• Welcome to Talk Jesus

    A true bible based, Jesus centered online community. Join over 13,000 members today

    Register Log In

A letter from an apostate

Users who viewed this discussion (Total:13)

Active
I can say from my surface knowledge that the universe didn’t need a god to start it, and the laws of nature can, in fact, create themselves.
You kept asking for evidences but you don’t provide any for your own convictions. At the very least, I’ve shared my personal experiences about God.

So what experiences did you have that tell you laws can create themselves? Because even just from observing human society, I can tell from experience that laws are instituted by beings of intelligence (ie. humans!) and cannot create themselves.

Scientists have found two identical snowflakes, and twins exist. Just because something seems remarkable or unexplainable, or just because you don’t understand something, doesn’t mean that there isn’t a natural explanation.
So what if there are twins? That doesn’t disprove that snowflakes are unique in its design, in general.

Except you haven’t provided a natural explanation so trying to convince me that you have the truth is futile.
 
Active
If God is all powerful (Luke 1:37), all loving (Psalm 86:15/Isaiah 40:28), and all knowing (1 John 3:20), then how is there evil in the world?
Your question is a fallacy. Luke 1:37 said the word of God cannot fail. It never said anything about the power of God in creation. Besides, evil is not matter or a part of creation, it is a concept or a knowlege. Your question makes no sense because you compare God’s power of creation with a concept called evil. Its comparing apples with oranges. God’s power in creation had nothing to do with the existence of a concept called evil.

If God is all loving, then surely he wouldn't want his creation to get hurt, and if he is all powerful, He would definitely be able to protect us without infringing on our freewill, and if he is all knowing, then He should know just how to do that, and yet evil persists, why?
Your definition of all powerful is ridiculous. God has the power to create, yes, but that doesn’t imply one bit His power at making matter extends to protecting you from your choices. Asking Him to prevent you from making bad choices without infringing on your free will is a logical impossibility.

And what has He owed you that He should come to protect you from natural disasters, when most of the times, you don’t acknowledge that He exists? All that talk about opposing slavery, and yet you treat Him the same way, even as far as denying His existence as though He isn’t a real person. What hypocrisy.

And if god is all knowing, then there is no free will. No matter what he decide to do, God already knows what we're going to do and the decisions we're going to make, so all long as god is all knowing, there can't be free will, and that is the problem of evil.
The fallacy of your logic is incredible. Just because I know beforehand you are going to go to school tomorrow means you didn’t choose to go to school yourself, that is what your logic says about God’s foreknowledge and free will. Need I say more?
 
Last edited:
Active
And I'm not going to bother replying to your last post, partly because it doesn't make sense to me, and partly because what I do understand I already explained morality and I don't have a faith, so it's irrelevant to me.
And this is the last time I’m responding to your posts, because you’ve clearly demonstrated that you aren’t here to be objective, but to be selectively biased about what you want to believe. I don’t know you but I know well enough about human behavior to know who is here to seek the truth and who isn’t.

The motive behind why you started this thread is insincere at best, God-hating at worst. Unless you are trying to dissuade more people from believing in Christ, I see no reason why you need to start this thread and post in the way you did. But the Gospel has prophesied about people falling away, not loving the truth and mocking the faith long ago so this is no surprise to me.
 
Member
And this is the last time I’m responding to your posts, because you’ve clearly demonstrated that you aren’t here to be objective, but to be selectively biased about what you want to believe. I don’t know you but I know well enough about human behavior to know who is here to seek the truth and who isn’t.

The motive behind why you started this thread is insincere at best, God-hating at worst. Unless you are trying to dissuade more people from believing in Christ, I see no reason why you need to start this thread and post in the way you did. But the Gospel has prophesied about people falling away, not loving the truth and mocking the faith long ago so this is no surprise to me.
@Enxu I had prepared a whole essay of a counter arguments that I'd spent 4 hours trying to respond to each of your points, but I deleted it all. It'd be pointless. You're not interested in conversation or what I have to say. You've called me a god-hater, deluded, and so on, and I'm not interested in having a conversation with someone as rude, dishonest, and condescending as you're being right now.
On the issue of slavery, you'd taken the scriptures and twisted them to fit your modern way of thinking. If I'd shown you verses from the Quran that condoned or even mentioned slavery, you would've immediately shut down the Quran, and yet you make an exception for the Bible.
Throughout your posts, you repeatedly assumed my position, saying that I hate god, or want to sin, which isn't true. I may not care about Christianity or God or whatever, but I still continue to be the same person I used to be. Since I'd converted to agnosticism, I hadn't done any drugs, or went out on a spree sleeping with everything that walks, or gotten pissed faced drunk, and I don't hate god any more than you hate the tooth fairy.
You may shake your head or roll your eyes at what I'm saying, but I just want you to know that I'm incredibly disappointed. You sound like a fun person to have a discussion with and you seem knowledgable enough about certain things, but a discussion with you is impossible for reasons I'd already listed above.
I've already ignored you, so don't bother trying to respond to this thread or messaging me.
 
Active
This is not a post in reply to the OP but as a response to those who have been reading this thread. As I have predicted, the attack has turned personal on me and I am the one being condescending, rude and dishonest simply because I have the tenacity to oppose many other even more condescending, hypocritical and rude posts from the OP herself against both God and myself. If you people look closely at the exchange, the OP is in fact guilty of every single thing she accused me of. There is much hypocrisy going on in her responses.

The Gospel prophesied long ago that the last days will be like the days of Noah, people will fall away and give heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of demons. It is very apparent to me that this is the exact case with the OP. And like Hebrews wrote, once someone who was enlightened turns away from God, it is impossible to renew them unto repentance as they crucify the Son of God afresh. Judas Iscariot, the one who betrayed Jesus, was the first to do so.

We are told by the teachings of Gospel not to engage in fruitless arguments and genealogies that oppose the truth of God. The warped minds of those who have chosen to oppose God will not accept either our personal testimonies or even scientific facts as evidences, they are wilfully deceived because they have no love for the truth. Even if Jesus was to stand before them with the same miracles He performed 2000 years ago, these opposers of God will react in the same way the Pharisees did, reject Him and crucify Him.

It is a very sobering fact that we actually witness people like the OP becoming this way on this forum, but not even God will force His truth on them, so who am I to do so? It is time for me to shake the dust off my feet and move on from this thread entirely. But I want to say to others not to be drawn into the false knowledge presented by the OP, your own experiences with God, what He did in your life is your testimony, hold onto the authenticity of your testimony. The truth will be revealed on the day of judgment and these false knowledge will be exposed as they are. Don’t be like Eve, who being not satisfied with what God has given (greed), ate the forbidden fruit for the pursuit of knowledge (lust).
 
Last edited:
Active
Continued from above:

Knowledge can be abused, misused and even twisted into lies. The empty pursuit of knowledge (from a heart of pride) without a purpose as to what to do with that knowledge leads to deception and corruption, just like what happened to Eve in the garden of Eden. Like the Gospel said, knowledge puffs up and leads to pride which is in itself sinful. The OP and many other atheists who claim to be in continuous pursuit of knowledge do so to their own detriment and fall into Satan’s trap of pride. God gives us just enough knowledge and wisdom for us to live as godly people, otherwise any knowledge is useless when it is not going to educate us on how to live godly lives. Beware not to fall into the trap of pursuing endless knowledge when it leads to nothing but a prideful attitude.

As a side note to what the OP mentioned about the Quran, I have actually read it before and even looked at the testimonies of some who subscribed to the religion, including the history of how it came to be. According to the personal testimony of those close to Muhammad, he didn’t become the founder by choice. He was forced into it by a spiritual being who commanded him to recite and tormented him three times in his cave when he couldn’t. He was so terrified that at one point he thought he was possessed and wanted to throw himself down a cliff and commit suicide. This testimony speaks to the origin of the religion.
 
Last edited:
Active
Continued from above:

Apostle Paul warned about being lured away from the simplicity of Christ. The simplicity of Christ is to love God and obey His command to love others. Any other knowledge that opposes this is false knowledge. Any additional knowledge is only there to make people proud.

Atheists and people like OP are deceived because they pursue knowledge that is useless in making them better persons. How does knowing how the universe is formed, for instance, make people more righteous? It doesn’t, that kind of knowledge only leads to pride and arrogance, and Satan loves to draw people away from God using this pursuit of knowledge as bait.

Almost every single cult and secret religion makes this claim of having superior knowledge. Because their drive is to get superior knowledge and not about being more righteous, Satan draws them away with pride and they forsake the truth for a lie. But the Christian faith, at its core, is about having the truth so we can practice righteousness. Let this be our drive and not the pursuit of fruitless knowledge.
 
Moderator
Staff Member
Dear @NYQueens977,

How to communicate the emotions I feel from reading your opening post to this thread. The weight of the pain that you experienced, without any help or guidance amazes me that you are presently, as far as I can tell, as well balanced a person at least in the written word as I've seen since the last Atheist, that was present here at Talk Jesus for many a year. Professing Christians, unless they happen to be in the Ministry, for the most part that is, are the only ones who come off that way. The lay people, are normally more passionate in what they believe, and how they communicate that belief, as you can tell from the replies you have received here, and elsewhere!
I realize that what you’re saying by identifying yourself as an Agnostic is that you really don’t know. That all your upbringing in the Christianity environment was not helpful in deducing whether there is a God or not, and adding Jesus to the mix I’m sure didn’t help either.

I mean that is something that Jesus faced all the time himself. Remember Nathaniel, when he said “Can anything good come from Nazareth?” Sense a little doubt coming from Nathaniel there? John 1:46 Did Jesus turn him away?

Matthew 8:23-27 – I mean people did not understand Him, when He did extraordinary things. What was the disciples’ reaction to Jesus after this? Being part of the inner circle and they still didn’t know Him, and guess what, many don’t know Him still.

See, Jesus didn’t condemn them, but rather had them continue on trying to find out who He is. He didn’t tell them to leave, though many left of their own accord, because they not only didn’t know who He was, they also couldn’t accept what they couldn’t understand (John 6:41-69).

I just added a survey in the News Forum, in which Christians were asked questions about Jesus amongst other things. Even with the Word of God in front of them, they still couldn’t get it right!

So, am I surprised that you, regardless of how much you believe you know about the Bible, coupled with the experiences you were brought up in and taught don’t know who He is? Not really. I mean the disciples themselves didn’t know for a long time who He was! Even after the resurrection they had doubts!!

Continue to ask your questions in seeking God, don’t stop in this. Just know that in so doing, that He was pursuing you first. Jesus’ message is really to you as an Agnostic. Be Welcome.

With you in mind I found this (link below), and though a little long, I hope you will take the time to read it. I also hope you’ll be able to access it.

F. W. Boreham

With the Love of Christ Jesus.
Nick
\o/
<><
 
Member
Hi NYQueens977, I just want to ask if you ever felt that God had said something to you through His word? Was there something on your conscience?

Perhaps there was something that he asked you to do?
 
Member
Dear @NYQueens977,

How to communicate the emotions I feel from reading your opening post to this thread. The weight of the pain that you experienced, without any help or guidance amazes me that you are presently, as far as I can tell, as well balanced a person at least in the written word as I've seen since the last Atheist, that was present here at Talk Jesus for many a year. Professing Christians, unless they happen to be in the Ministry, for the most part that is, are the only ones who come off that way. The lay people, are normally more passionate in what they believe, and how they communicate that belief, as you can tell from the replies you have received here, and elsewhere!
I realize that what you’re saying by identifying yourself as an Agnostic is that you really don’t know. That all your upbringing in the Christianity environment was not helpful in deducing whether there is a God or not, and adding Jesus to the mix I’m sure didn’t help either.

I mean that is something that Jesus faced all the time himself. Remember Nathaniel, when he said “Can anything good come from Nazareth?” Sense a little doubt coming from Nathaniel there? John 1:46 Did Jesus turn him away?

Matthew 8:23-27 – I mean people did not understand Him, when He did extraordinary things. What was the disciples’ reaction to Jesus after this? Being part of the inner circle and they still didn’t know Him, and guess what, many don’t know Him still.

See, Jesus didn’t condemn them, but rather had them continue on trying to find out who He is. He didn’t tell them to leave, though many left of their own accord, because they not only didn’t know who He was, they also couldn’t accept what they couldn’t understand (John 6:41-69).

I just added a survey in the News Forum, in which Christians were asked questions about Jesus amongst other things. Even with the Word of God in front of them, they still couldn’t get it right!

So, am I surprised that you, regardless of how much you believe you know about the Bible, coupled with the experiences you were brought up in and taught don’t know who He is? Not really. I mean the disciples themselves didn’t know for a long time who He was! Even after the resurrection they had doubts!!

Continue to ask your questions in seeking God, don’t stop in this. Just know that in so doing, that He was pursuing you first. Jesus’ message is really to you as an Agnostic. Be Welcome.

With you in mind I found this (link below), and though a little long, I hope you will take the time to read it. I also hope you’ll be able to access it.

F. W. Boreham

With the Love of Christ Jesus.
Nick
\o/
<><
Hello, and thank you for taking the time to read and reply to my thread, as messy as it was. I just want to clarify a few points if you don't mind.
As an agnostic, I'm not saying that I don't know there is a god, I'm saying that I can't know there is a god based on the available evidences we have. In other words, there is no evidence to either completely prove or disprove god, so I believe it's foolish to say with 100% certainty that there is or isn't a god.
One of the main reasons why I turned away from Christianity was actually because of the Bible. One of the reasons I listed above was slavery. After reading a book that is supposed to be divinely inspired by an all knowing and all loving god that condoned something as immoral as slavery, I began to question the divinity of the holy bible. I came to realize through this and other discoveries that the Bible was just a book written by ancient people in the middle east, for ancient people in the middle east. I also realized just how much Christianity evolved from it's conception to it's modern practice, and I'm not just talking about the crusades. To put it simply, if you were to have met one of the earliest christians, they probably would've called you an apostate. This, to me, makes christianity as a whole seem that much less divine.

Now to refer to your facebook post, I'm sorry, it's beautifully written, but I can't agree with a lot of what it's saying. First off, I feel like this post grossly misrepresents what it means to be an agnostic. The post refers to agnosticism as mere skepticism- it's not. As I said before, but I will highlight with a dictionary definition for sake of clarity: [An agnostic is] a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (such as God) is unknown and probably unknowable broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god.
I only wanted to clarify this because you aren't the first person to come to me with this misconception, and you are not alone in saying that. Yes, I am open to the idea that maybe there is a god somewhere out there in existence, but I cannot believe that there is one unless there is tangible evidence, and to ask me to believe in something without evidence is irrational and unreasonable. That is why I always define my agnosticism, not as someone who doesn't know, but as someone who can't know. Because to say that you don't know implies that there is a means to learn, but saying that one can't know shows just how limited our understanding of the world and our universe really is. That's my position.

The essay you sent me also talks about faith. He compares agnosticism to faith since having faith is you admitting that you don't know something. This is also inaccurate. Being an agnostic is acknowledging that there are things that, with our current understanding, we can't know. Faith is the act of believing in something, even when there is either no evidence or if evidence to the contrary. The person I was debating above had faith that the Bible is absolute in it's morality, even when I pointed out that the Bible blatantly condones and encourages slavery. This is a prime example of how faith is flawed when stood up to critical thought and reason. A person can have faith in something, but does that mean that the thing they have faith in is correct or reasonable? Not necessarily.

"Every day of his life a man should thank God for his knowledge and for his ignorance—for the one as much as for the other." Once again, being agnostic isn't just saying "I don't know", but it's an acknowledgment of what we can't know. And it's almost ironic how this essay heralds ignorance and skepticism as ideal for christians, and even writes a beautifully ironic conclusion that heralds ignorance and curiosity as the staple for discovery, yet continues to make the claim that there is a God with an implied absolute certainty. This isn't what agnosticism is.

But thank you for the article. It was fun breaking it down and analyzing it. It's quite late right now for me, so I'll probably re-read it again tomorrow to try and see if there's anything I missed.

I look forward to hearing your response.
 
Loyal
@NYQueens977 I understand your agnostic position.

Hypothetically, what evidence would convince you that a) there is a God, or b) there is no God?

Or what would it take for you to become either a firm theist or atheist?
 
Member
@NYQueens977 I understand your agnostic position.

Hypothetically, what evidence would convince you that a) there is a God, or b) there is no God?

Or what would it take for you to become either a firm theist or atheist?
Concrete evidence that there is a god. Ie, if God showed himself to me the same way I can see my friends or mother. I'll acknowledge there's a god the day he becomes measurable and observable.
 
Moderator
Staff Member
Dear NYQueens

FM: NYBklyn
:)

Hello, and thank you for taking the time to read and reply to my thread, as messy as it was. I just want to clarify a few points if you don't mind.
As an agnostic, I'm not saying that I don't know there is a god, I'm saying that I can't know there is a god based on the available evidences we have. In other words, there is no evidence to either completely prove or disprove god, so I believe it's foolish to say with 100% certainty that there is or isn't a god.
By which it means to me is that the evidence available to you is unacceptable as confirming that there is a God. So, as it currently stands you really don’t know, because you also don’t know what that evidence might be (assumption here) that would convince you that there is a God. That is why the Bible won’t help you in that. For the writers of the Bible had no need to convince anyone to the existence of God, for they knew that He did exist prior to their putting pen to paper so to speak. Keep in mind that they were not writing to convince you of a “God”, but rather what “God” wanted you to know about Him. So, the only way you can come to look at Scripture as being inspired by God, is by utilizing historical evidence outside of Scripture to confirm Biblical Historicity. Just reading the Bible for an Agnostic, is only a good read, unless they do the additional research/comparison necessary to garner a greater understanding which bridges the gap between knowing and acceptance.


One of the main reasons why I turned away from Christianity was actually because of the Bible. One of the reasons I listed above was slavery. After reading a book that is supposed to be divinely inspired by an all knowing and all loving god that condoned something as immoral as slavery, I began to question the divinity of the holy bible. I came to realize through this and other discoveries that the Bible was just a book written by ancient people in the middle east, for ancient people in the middle east. I also realized just how much Christianity evolved from it's conception to it's modern practice, and I'm not just talking about the crusades. To put it simply, if you were to have met one of the earliest christians, they probably would've called you an apostate. This, to me, makes christianity as a whole seem that much less divine.
The problem it appears you have is that you are of the belief that God condones man’s immorality of behavior to one another, in the Historical telling of the Bible, and the History of the abuses/corruption of Christianity by man. Can I assume that you also believe that there is no accountability for said behavior? Because only in believing that God does not hold anyone accountable, can one believe that God condones the immoral abuses of a corrupted life by man.

To go one step further, one can see in Christ Jesus, God showed us another way, unknown to humanity till then, which was to Love one another. We see this through our Lord’s death on the Cross. Which I hope you actually believe as an historical event?

As far as being considered an Apostate by early Christians, it would not be surprising. There were differences even in the early church, or we’d not have had Gnostics, as well as other beliefs, existing to this day. Still, the basic tenets of Christianity, that Christ Jesus lived, died, and rose again is not necessarily one of them, except maybe by some cults.

We also understand that these differences are not because of the fault of the foundation we have in Christ Jesus, but rather the opposition that we have in Satan. Who is able to influence humanity, and yes, one which God allows. Which of course is another issue entirely!

Now to refer to your facebook post, I'm sorry, it's beautifully written, but I can't agree with a lot of what it's saying. First off, I feel like this post grossly misrepresents what it means to be an agnostic. The post refers to agnosticism as mere skepticism- it's not. As I said before, but I will highlight with a dictionary definition for sake of clarity: [An agnostic is] a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (such as God) is unknown and probably unknowable broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god.
I only wanted to clarify this because you aren't the first person to come to me with this misconception, and you are not alone in saying that. Yes, I am open to the idea that maybe there is a god somewhere out there in existence, but I cannot believe that there is one unless there is tangible evidence, and to ask me to believe in something without evidence is irrational and unreasonable. That is why I always define my agnosticism, not as someone who doesn't know, but as someone who can't know. Because to say that you don't know implies that there is a means to learn, but saying that one can't know shows just how limited our understanding of the world and our universe really is. That's my position.

The essay you sent me also talks about faith. He compares agnosticism to faith since having faith is you admitting that you don't know something. This is also inaccurate. Being an agnostic is acknowledging that there are things that, with our current understanding, we can't know. Faith is the act of believing in something, even when there is either no evidence or if evidence to the contrary. The person I was debating above had faith that the Bible is absolute in it's morality, even when I pointed out that the Bible blatantly condones and encourages slavery. This is a prime example of how faith is flawed when stood up to critical thought and reason. A person can have faith in something, but does that mean that the thing they have faith in is correct or reasonable? Not necessarily.

"Every day of his life a man should thank God for his knowledge and for his ignorance—for the one as much as for the other." Once again, being agnostic isn't just saying "I don't know", but it's an acknowledgment of what we can't know. And it's almost ironic how this essay heralds ignorance and skepticism as ideal for christians, and even writes a beautifully ironic conclusion that heralds ignorance and curiosity as the staple for discovery, yet continues to make the claim that there is a God with an implied absolute certainty. This isn't what agnosticism is.

But thank you for the article. It was fun breaking it down and analyzing it. It's quite late right now for me, so I'll probably re-read it again tomorrow to try and see if there's anything I missed.
I’m glad you enjoyed the article. Look to the etymology of Agnostic and you might be surprised by the ties it has to belief systems/religion. For the truth of the matter is that unless God provides a revelation to Humanity, you’d be correct in your belief.

Too often the messengers and those who profess to believe in Christ Jesus are poor examples of the truth of God’s message to the unbeliever. The following quote from Mahatma Gandhi, speaks volumes and speaks straight to the point on how poorly we as Christians comport ourselves to a dying world “Jesus is ideal and wonderful, but you Christians – you are not like him.”

With the Love of Christ Jesus.
Nick
\o/
<><
 
Active
I doubt this thread will change the opinion of anyone, much less the OP no matter what evidences we bring.

It is not those who engage in debates like this who will know the truth of whether God exists. If a person seeks a life of righteousness and selfless love and makes a practice of these virtues till the day of death, he/she already knows God even if he/she does not openly subscribe to the Christian religion.

But a philosopher or educated mind who spends his or her life in theological debates and research like this but is lax about practising righteousness can have all the knowledge and yet come no closer to the truth than an illiterate.

Both the person who practised righteousness as a lifestyle and the philosopher will one day have to face reality and know that God exists, the person who was righteous would have no problem accepting God even if he/she previously had no religious affiliations because His law would agree with his/her lifestyle and He would reward him/her accordingly. But the philosopher would be confounded and find that his/her entire life of debate and research only brought about confusion, and none of his/her knowledge would be sufficient to deny what he/she will personally see on the day of judgment. Not only that, having failed to escape from corruption, he/she would have to face the consequences and fall under eternal judgment.
 
Loyal
Concrete evidence that there is a god. Ie, if God showed himself to me the same way I can see my friends or mother. I'll acknowledge there's a god the day he becomes measurable and observable.
That's quite a high bar you've set! after all, you've never had an opportunity to measure or observe me (it is possible that it's just a bot a wayward algorithm or an infinite number of monkeys writing to you). Ill bet that you haven't questioned my existence. And even if you did, you'd probably conclude that the probability is that a human calling himself hekuran is writing.

Being agnostic is a reasonable intellectual position. But when it comes to real life, each of has to make a choice to live either as if there is a God, or as if there is no God.

And then the initial decision has to based on balance of probability rather than 100% certainty.
 
Member
You act out of faith, not mans foolish wisdom.Look around the earth, you can see the marks of God everywhere. All these plants, people, animals, environment didnt self develop, that is preposterous .
 
Active
Concrete evidence that there is a god. Ie, if God showed himself to me the same way I can see my friends or mother. I'll acknowledge there's a god the day he becomes measurable and observable.
Unfortunately the day when you do see God with your naked eyes will be the day of judgment, and it will not be pretty. God does show Himself to people, people like Moses and Abraham and they were not demanding evidences of His existence like you did. God had also shown Himself to Muslims who then converted from Islam to Christianity under the threats of death, I have read countless testimonies like this.

I don’t know your heart but God does, if He is not showing Himself to you it is probably because He knows you will reject Him even if you do actually see Him for yourself. The Pharisees also said they will believe in Jesus if He saved Himself from the cross. But they were never being sincere, and I doubt you are here too.
 
Member
There over thousands of message boards on different sites.
I hear Kenworth have an excellent message board, and there is discussions about there products all over the world. Highly reccomended. Just dont go there and try and tell them Mack trucks are better though.
 

Similar threads

Top