JillUser JillUser

Nonchristian vs Antichristian

▼

Nonchristian vs Antichristian

There's a big difference

from JoeUser Forums

I think everyone who doesn't consider themselves christian has gotten accused of being antichristian at one time or another.  I have gotten accused many times.  Ironically the accusers are people with some sort of martyr complex who assume that they will be persecuted for being christian.  They take issue with me in anticipation of my taking issue with them.

I am not denying that there are plenty of people on the planet who actually are antichristian.  I just find it odd when I or some of the kindest people I know have been labeled as such.  It isn't a 'you're either with me or against me' subject. 

I am also perplexed as to why so many christians can't fathom anyone believing in God without believing Jesus is his son.  I can understand why they can believe in Jesus not because it makes sense to me but because I am open minded and realize that other people have different experiences in life than what I have experienced in my own.  Those experiences help form how we see the world and how we fit in it.  If you see only your path, your way as being the only way, then you are not open minded.

religion
19,414 views 173 replies
Reply #101 from JoeUser Forums Top

For a nonbeliever, there is a similarity between the resurrection and santa claus--they don't believe that either are real. I'm not sure how it is intolerant to state a belief.

Jesus died,  He was real.  santa Claus was never real.  Gid's point is if you are going to equate a belief based upon known history, with childhood fantasies, you have already shown your prejudice and closed mindedness as well as your intolerance.  Non beleivers can doubt the resurection, but to equate a historical figure with imaginary ones is just plain stupid.

Reply #102 from JoeUser Forums Top
Ironic, you complained about your rhetorical questions not seen as rhetoric in the same paragraph as you answered my rhetorical questions. I asked those questions not because I needed them answered rather to make a point about intolerance.


Jill, isn't it fun
WindowBlinds - Free yourself of the default settings, customize your desktop.
Reply #103 from JoeUser Forums Top
Jesus died, He was real. santa Claus was never real.


Reexamine what you just said Dr. Guy. Noone equated Jesus with Santa. The comparison was between the resurrection and Santa. There is no more proof that the resurrection happened then that Santa exists. You can't prove or disprove either. I know it sounds crazy but there are grown people who believe in Santa. They wish for a new job, snow on their vacation, whatever, and credit it to the magic of Santa.

To a nonchristian, the story of the virgin birth and resurrection seem equally mythical.

Non beleivers can doubt the resurection, but to equate a historical figure with imaginary ones is just plain stupid.


BenUser only doubted the virgin birth and resurrection. He never suggested Jesus didn't exist.
Reply #104 from JoeUser Forums Top
Dr. Guy:

I suggest you reread what BenUser wrote, because he didn't compare Jesus to Santa Claus. He said:

If someone wants to believe in the virgin birth and resurrection, the tooth fairy, Santa Claus, martians, ghosts, vampires, or any other myth, so be it... whatever gets you through the night. I become anti-whatever when someone thinks they are better than everyone else, simply because of his or her beliefs.


He compared the virgin birth and the resurrection to santa and myths. There is no history that proves that either of these events happened. Before you start throwing around the term "stupid" you should double check what was actually written.
Reply #106 from JoeUser Forums Top
Jill, isn't it fun

Is that rhetorical? *grins*
Reply #107 from JoeUser Forums Top
Hee hee
Reply #108 from JoeUser Forums Top

Sorry Jill, I think we were typing at the same time.


I guess REALLY great minds think alike...at the same time

Jill, isn't it fun

Is that rhetorical? *grins*


Good one HC!
Reply #109 from JoeUser Forums Top
"If someone wants to believe in the virgin birth and resurrection, the tooth fairy, Santa Claus, martians, ghosts, vampires, or any other myth, so be it... whatever gets you through the night. I become anti-whatever when someone thinks they are better than everyone else, simply because of his or her beliefs."


What people also don't understand is that to assume something doesn't exist also takes belief. You don't KNOW there is no Santa Claus, you BELIEVE there is no Santa Claus. You may BELIEVE there was no virgin birth, but don't pretend you *know*.

Since it is all belief, then no one is really better than anyone else. Not the Christian for believing in, and not the atheist for beleiving otherwise. Both are totally subjective, unprovable beliefs. The Atheist that believes he or she is smarter for not believing is no different than a Christian who believes they are better because they believe.
Reply #110 from JoeUser Forums Top
What people also don't understand is that to assume something doesn't exist also takes belief. You don't KNOW there is no Santa Claus, you BELIEVE there is no Santa Claus. You may BELIEVE there was no virgin birth, but don't pretend you *know*.


Very true Baker.
Reply #111 from JoeUser Forums Top
What people also don't understand is that to assume something doesn't exist also takes belief. You don't KNOW there is no Santa Claus, you BELIEVE there is no Santa Claus. You may BELIEVE there was no virgin birth, but don't pretend you *know*.


I'll agree to that.
Reply #112 from JoeUser Forums Top
There is no more proof that the resurrection happened then that Santa exists.


Actually there is. For WIIW, there were eye witnesses. They may not be reliable, depending upon your belief, but there were there.
Reply #113 from JoeUser Forums Top
Actually there is. For WIIW, there were eye witnesses. They may not be reliable, depending upon your belief, but there were there.


There are people who have claimed to have seen or even claim to be Santa too. Stories of eyewitnesses still fall under the "myth" category Dr. Guy. Are you really saying there is 'proof' of the resurrection? I don't even know where to start with that one.
Reply #114 from JoeUser Forums Top
I am Christian, and I dont think it is my way or the hiway.

No, doc... it's YAHweh or the highway. *grins* Sorry... couldn't resist.
Reply #115 from JoeUser Forums Top

Are you really saying there is 'proof' of the resurrection? I don't even know where to start with that one.

I never said proof.  Only evidence. There is a difference. 

Reply #116 from JoeUser Forums Top
Are you really saying there is 'proof' of the resurrection? I don't even know where to start with that one.

I never said proof. Only evidence. There is a difference.


You may have MEANT evidence but this is what was written:

There is no more proof that the resurrection happened then that Santa exists.


Actually there is.


But I would still argue that you have no more 'evidence' of the resurrection than others have of Santa.
Reply #117 from JoeUser Forums Top
"There is no more proof that the resurrection happened then that Santa exists. "


Do we have non-fictional accounts of seeing the real Santa Claus? We have non-fictional accounts of seeing Jesus after He was crucified, and the one with Thomas who actually saw His wounds.

Not saying that you have to believe them, but the accounts are there. As I said, without accounts you choose to or not to believe, you wouldn't know there was a battle of hastings, either.
Reply #118 from JoeUser Forums Top
I just had some thoughts reading thru some of the comments here. First on what Jesus looked like. Scripture makes it clear that he was nothing to look at.

"For he shall grow up before him as a tender plant and as a root out of dry gound he has no form nor comeliness and when we shall see him there is no beauty that we should desire him." Isa 53:2

Also the Jewish scribes kept meticulous care of all of the OT books of which Ezra put together and most of which Jesus either quoted from or read from. So the Christians and Jews share more than just the first 5 books. They share from Genesis to Malachi or in the Jewish Bible I believe the last book is 11 Chronicles which is near the front for us. That would be 39 books not just 5.

I agree with Doc about the evidence. What's the diff between evidence and proof by the way?

enjoyed the discussion but am staying away from Santa. I gave that up years ago........
Reply #119 from JoeUser Forums Top

Do we have non-fictional accounts of seeing the real Santa Claus?


Yes. I saw the real santa when I was a little child.

It turned out it was actually a neighbour in a mask. But until I learned that the world had a non-fictional account of seeing the real Santa Claus.
Reply #120 from JoeUser Forums Top
Ah, Christianity is probably just based on a guy in a Jesus suit, then. Ah, well. I guess I'll try Zorastrianism next...
Reply #121 from JoeUser Forums Top

Christianity is probably just based on a guy in a Jesus suit, then.


In a way, yes.

And Judaism is based on a guy in a Moses suit.
Reply #122 from JoeUser Forums Top
Ah, Christianity is probably just based on a guy in a Jesus suit, then. Ah, well. I guess I'll try Zorastrianism next...


Baker, I do know of people who claim to have seen Santa. There are 'eyewitness' accounts of ghosts, the loch ness, bigfoot, etc. We label those people as crazy these days but I would wager if some gal came to you and claimed she was a virgin and about to have God's baby, she would be labeled the same.

I am beginning to think by this discussion that I am the only one who has had any experience with trial law. Don't you people even watch law shows on TV?

agree with Doc about the evidence. What's the diff between evidence and proof by the way?


Evidence is something that might lead you to a conclusion about something.

Proof is when evidence is tested to determine it's validity to a point where there is no question about the conclusion.

Eyewitness accounts are thrown out as evidence all the time due to the character of the witness. Can anyone out there personally attest to personally knowing (i.e. being in the company of) any of the 'witnesses' at the resurrection? I'll answer that...no. Even then, eyewitness accounts are first hand. All we have are ancient stories of people claiming to have seen something. For all I know, they could have been drunk or ate some moldy corn (which will make you halucinate).

Evidence is pretty subjective though. Something seen or heard might lead different people to completely different conclusions. That is why if Dr. Guy and KFC feel that the bible is evidence, I can't prove them wrong and they can't prove me wrong because it isn't something that convinces me to come to the same conclusion. It certainly isn't proof because there are plenty of things to question about it.


God seems to have given people in a very specific region of the world, 2000 years ago, 'evidence'. If he wants us all to have proof, why doesn't he demonstrate his presence again in some undeniable way? Perhaps if God simply wants us to have faith, people should stop trying to claim there is 'proof'.
Reply #123 from JoeUser Forums Top
Well then I probably have my evidence and proof put together as one. I see the evidence and feel it "proves" that God is who he says he is. When we find or discover different things that seem to be in line with what scripture teaches I look at that also as proof. Things like science, archeology and historical discoveries that allow for biblical inerrancy.

Paul talked a bit about this in Romans 1:18-22 saying that the things that are made (creation) reveal to all men the eternal power and divinity of the true God so that the rejection of this truth makes a man without excuse before God. In other words, it doesn't matter if you know what the book says, God gave us creation as evidence to make a decision.

So maybe for some they may call it evidence that doesn't lead anywhere and others like me evidence that leads to proof.

I think of the OT when God provided water from a rock to the disbelieving Hebrews. He later said thru the Psalmist that he "proved" to them who he was but they still would not listen. He said:

"You called in trouble and I delivered you. I answered you in the secret place of thunder. I proved you at the waters of Meribah. Hear O my people and I will testify to you O Israel if you will listen to me." Ps 81:7-8

So while maybe while I can see and feel there is "proof" I cannot "prove" to another. It has to come from inside their own heart as God reveals to them. That's where faith matters. There are some that may say...."it's just a coincidence that the rock gave us water at the right time." Where others would say...."it's an act and provision of God."
Reply #124 from JoeUser Forums Top
Well KFC, if God ever makes water come from a rock for me, I would believe it. People throw the term 'miracle' around pretty lightly though. There really are coincidences that have plenty of rational explainations that people label as a miracle. A rock providing water couldn't be coincidence because it isn't something that can logically happen without some sort of trick.

You have to be inspired some way to have faith. I don't doubt that everyone who is religious has plenty of their own reasons for their faith. I simply have not been inspired in heart or mind or given any "proof" as far as I'm concerned. Just as love can't be forced, faith can't be forced or brought about by any outside source like you said, it is in your heart...or it isn't.
Reply #125 from JoeUser Forums Top
JillUser:
There are people who have claimed to have seen or even claim to be Santa too. Stories of eyewitnesses still fall under the "myth" category Dr. Guy. Are you really saying there is 'proof' of the resurrection? I don't even know where to start with that one.


The irony here is, more people have claimed to see Santa, UFOs or Bigfoot than have seen Ununtrium, but if we question the existance of that element, we would be called crazy! ;~D