Did Jesus and Paul understand atheism?

@philokalia said
There is the famous passage:

For the director of music. Of David. The fool says in his heart, "There is no God."

This is form Pslam 14; Psalm 53 also opens up with a reference to fools saying there is no God.

Because of this passage alone, it appears that the concept of atheism is directly confronted. We know that Christ also knew the Psalms -- He ...[text shortened]... his narrative but maybe there is some richer perspective you can give us to back up the perspective.

I don't see what you present as being a "rich perspective" at all. Quite the opposite. The Bible stuff all strikes me as having been written by limited people with nothing more than a partisan and parochial perspective.

What bearing does something like John 1:50, for example, have on the millions of Muslims and Hindus and Buddhists who live in the country where I live?

The Bible preaches to the choir, fair enough, but where is its non-preaching-to-the-choir-like outreach to non-Christians where it demonstrates its understanding of lack of belief and the diversity of theist beliefs?

Wittering on about "free will" seems like a weak and mundane cop-out and not "divinely" inspired at all.

Why would there be such an ineffective "revelation" by a god figure - where his worshippers [the choir] tell themselves he wants to "save" everyone - followed by those unconvinced by it being tortured for eternity, a punishment that is bizarrely kept secret from humanity?

You think yours is a "rich perspective"? It sounds to me like a baddie from a poorly written movie.

@sonship

@sonship said
You may notice some things if you read carefully. Then you can avoid such mistakes as the woman in John 4 left the scene condemned and ready to perish.

You are missing the point really. We know nothing of her faith thereafter. If it's supposed to be delivering some doctrine for future generations, it's feeble and superficial; written by people with a poor understanding of other religions or other beliefs.

So if "Jesus" is said to do some kind of trick or seemingly magical thing - in person - on someone we do not know and whose life thereafter we know nothing about... that somehow demonstrates an understanding of atheism and diverse religions? It's ridiculous.

People of her religion ~ regardless of how good and kind they were, like she was ~ are destined for being tormented in burning flames for eternity unless they become Christians according to your ideology. Read what I said to Philokalia above.

@fmf said
I don't see what you present as being a "rich perspective" at all. Quite the opposite. The Bible stuff all strikes me as having been written by limited people with nothing more than a partisan and parochial perspective.

What bearing does something like John 1:50, for example, have on the millions of Muslims and Hindus and Buddhists who live in the country where I live?

Th ...[text shortened]...
You think yours is a "rich perspective"? It sounds to me like a baddie from a poorly written movie.

How would you demonstrate an understanding of a lack of belief?

There are other passages still that deal with the concept of a lack of belief, and, indeed, the entire book of Job can be said to deal with the concept of whether or not God is looking down upon us during times of trouble...

I think the Bible pretty completely addresses the topic.

I also think that the revelation of Christ was pretty effective -- a third of humanity are Christians and an even greater share are pretty informed about it. Another third of humanity (or slightly less) are Muslims, a religion that regards Christ as a prophet...

It's hard to say that the world's most popular religion had an ineffective revelation simply because the wealthiest and furthest people from God within its tradition reject it.

Jesus loves you. ^^

@philokalia said
How would you demonstrate an understanding of a lack of belief?

We'll go by a couple of simple questions that prominent Christians here who propagate the ideology of 'torment in burning flames for eternity' [as you put it] refuse to answer and have no scripture - no 'wisdom' or understanding from Paul or Jesus - to help them.

What is the logical and moral justification for trying to scare non-believers into being believers into becoming believers through threats that they feel they have no reason?

It shows zero understanding of non-belief or other-belief.

What is the logical and moral justification for carrying out the torture on non-believers in secret when the non-believers who are still-living do not know about it?

It shows zero understanding of human nature as it pertains to non-belief or other-belief.

@philokalia said
I also think that the revelation of Christ was pretty effective -- a third of humanity are Christians and an even greater share are pretty informed about it. Another third of humanity (or slightly less) are Muslims, a religion that regards Christ as a prophet...

I think pretty much everyone knowing that your god figure exists and that Jesus was divine - after which it's up to people's free will as to whether they obey his commandments - would be an effective revelation. What we have instead is a rather half-baked and psychologically bogus ideology that sounds manmade.

@fmf said
We'll go by a couple of simple questions that prominent Christians here who propagate the ideology of 'torment in burning flames for eternity' [as you put it] refuse to answer and have no scripture - no 'wisdom' or understanding from Paul or Jesus - to help them.

What is the logical and moral justification for trying to scare non-believers into being believers into becoming b ...[text shortened]... ut it?

It shows zero understanding of human nature as it pertains to non-belief or other-belief.

And so here we are, on page 2, and "did Jesus & Paul understand atheism?" is now...

... another thread about hell!

But sure, I will play along. You enjoy this topic -- I can enjoy it with you.

(1) They are not attempting to scare non-believers with threats of hell.. They are warning them of something that is real.

How could there be no understanding of non-belief, then, if the actual purpose is to point out something that is real?

(2a) I do not understand the "secret" clause. What about hell is a secret within Christianity?

I also do not think "non-believer" is an accurate description of the process. There will be people who are not explicitly Christian in heaven and who are spared hellfire. Indeed, St. Justin Martyr apparently believed that some amount of knowledge is required to be held culpabale before being sent to hell...

(2b) Hell is a necessary feature of existence.

Since the soul is immortal, and since a soul separated from God through its own choices experiments grave torment in total separation from God -- a torment likened to flames and isolation -- those who consciously reject God send themselves to hell.

(3) How is human nature failing to be understood?

@philokalia said
(1) They are not attempting to scare non-believers with threats of hell.. They are warning them of something that is real.

Not to non-believers, it isn't. The idea that it is somehow "real" because believers believe it is "real" sounds like believers singing to the believers' choir. It shows no understanding of human nature and no understanding of the nature of belief.

@philokalia said
How could there be no understanding of non-belief, then, if the actual purpose is to point out something that is real?

Singing to the choir demonstrates "no understanding of non-belief". The purpose is singing to the choir of believers.

@philokalia said
I do not understand the "secret" clause. What about hell is a secret within Christianity?

There is no evidence whatsoever that anyone is tortured in burning in flames for eternity. None at all. If it is happening, it is being kept secret from nonbelievers.

@philokalia said
I also do not think "non-believer" is an accurate description of the process. There will be people who are not explicitly Christian in heaven and who are spared hellfire.

If you don't subscribe to the torturer god ideology espoused by the likes of sonship, KellyJay, Eladar, and others, so be it. Take it up with them.

@fmf said
If you don't subscribe to the torturer god ideology espoused by the likes of sonship, KellyJay, Eladar, and others, so be it. Take it up with them.

Really, now!

You are the one directly asking me questions, and I am the one answering these questions and generously elaborating on my answers...

And you are telling me to take it up with them!

What, you suddenly don't have the stomach for the topic and would prefer to play me off of other Christians?

@fmf said
There is no evidence whatsoever that anyone is tortured in burning in flames for eternity. None at all. If it is happening, it is being kept secret from nonbelievers.

Aw, so it's like this:

(1) The Church says she believes sinners will go to hell.

(2) Sinners (theoretically) go to hell.

(3) The Church continues to actively talk about the issue of hell, and even there are stories people are unwilling to believe about demons and torments in hell that they say are going on now. They even try, in some cases, to bring forward evidence of demonic possession and tell stories that are meant to attest to the nature of hell... .

(4) You criticize them actively, and others make fun of them for believing in hell and believing in demons, they think their attempts to warn them are pathetic. Some Christians are even embarrassed to talk about the topic...

Yet, here we are talking about it...

(5) ... and you claim this is all a secretive process.

I guess it's not enough to say that you don't have evidence anymore.

The fact that you [i]don't have empirical proof of it means that it must be a secretive process which you are more guilty of!{/i]

@philokalia said
How is human nature failing to be understood?

Because the two questions I asked remain unanswered. The whole 'threat' - 'coercion' - 'deterrent' - 'revenge' thing is psychologically bogus.

There used to be a Hindu poster called Dasa here. He warned that every non-Hindu will be reincarnated as a cockroach or some such if they remain non-Hindus. He asserted that this "threat" was "real". Did it scare anyone here into becoming a Hindu? No. Is there now any evidence that anyone from here who died a non-Hindu is now a cockroach? Christian fearmongering is no more or less valid than Dasa's fearmongering.

@philokalia said
And you are telling me to take it up with them!

Take up the ideology of non-Christians being tortured with the Christians who espouse the ideology. I am not going to explain it or defend it. Don't use an atheist as a proxy in your ideological disagreements.

@fmf said
Not to non-believers, it isn't. The idea that it is somehow "real" because believers believe it is "real" sounds like believers singing to the believers' choir. It shows no understanding of human nature and no understanding of the nature of belief.

... So you demand evidence from God that God is real, and if He doesn't provide you with it, with evidence beyond the creation itself, and the word of God, and the many people who try their best to bear witness to Him...

He is lacking?

Alright.

I get it.

So, us Christians on this website should pray that you are given the signs that you need to come to God and have a spiritual moment. We want the best for you.

But hey... This isn't really the best piece in your arsenal of argument.

You are saying that since we do not have empirical evidence to convince everyone beyond a shadow of a doubt we are full of hot air, but you should be aware that the teacher would not be a teacher if he had the students take the test with all the answers on a sheet next to them as opposed to encouraging them to actually learn the right way.