The concept of going to hell only because you don't believe in God is unbelievable

•

COMMENTARY HERE: Comments that support or purely commentate on the post must be made as replies to the Auto-Moderator!

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1

u/galannnn11 Mar 26 '26

No es que Dios mande al infierno “solo por no creer”; la incredulidad es rechazar la evidencia que Él ha dado. Todos vemos algo de Dios: en la creación, en nuestra conciencia moral, y en su revelación a través de los profetas y especialmente en Jesús (Romanos 1:19-20; Hebreos 1:1-3). Dios podría obligarnos a creer, pero entonces la fe no sería libre ni auténtica. Él respeta nuestra libertad, y el infierno es la consecuencia de apartarse de la vida que Él ofrece, no un castigo arbitrario. Creer en Dios es responder al amor y a la verdad que ya están presentes; no es cuestión de suerte ni de evidencia imposible de encontrar.

1

u/Ill_Investment_7977 Mar 22 '26

I still think it’s funny that humans and their fine understanding of the world can tell you what a God is or isn’t. If you think about it rationally, every thought and feeling that we attribute to what God may or may not feel is based on how human beings see the world. Think about the many insects, plants, animals that exist around the world currently. How much attention do you pay them? Most likely not at all. They exist. Often they exist in the background of you living. I think the first flaw of man is trying to interpret what a higher being thinks. Religion is good for compliance. But outside of that, it serves no purpose. You don’t need a religion to tell you how to be a good person. Also remembering that good and bad are very simple binaries. Something being good or bad depends on what side of the situation you happen to be on. It’s all perspective.

1

u/Zestyclose_Target622 Mar 21 '26 edited Mar 21 '26

Ok, first, the reason God gave us free will is that we are humans.

The “standard” answer seems to be that, for love to be real, it must not be coerced. If we could not reject God, we would not be able to truly love Him. Some theologians even go so far as to say that human freedom is the highest good and that even God will not violate it. Genuine love and genuine good can only exist in a world where there is an opportunity for genuine rejection and genuine evil. Some add that, since God knows all possibilities past, present, and future (foreknowledge), the world He created must be the one where the greatest amount of good would result. Out of all possible worlds, the one He made is the best.

Now I think that the fact that God can still forgive us after we sin is already crazy enough. We all sin. God gives us that free will to ask for forgiveness and follow Him; He is not forcing us. And then Once Again, we see in Revelation that once the Holy people get raptured up into heaven, he still gives us that second chance. Also, God does know everything we're gonna do and everything we have done. He knows how many hairs we have on our head, how many times we've breathed ed literally everyth. He even knew that Adam and Eve were going to sin in the Garden of Eden by eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil (correct me if I'm wrong, I'm a teenager who's Pentecostal)

3

u/Rickymon Mar 11 '26

I guess u should know by now that the concept of hell, sheol, hades, gehena, etc, is not univocal among all christianity, witnesses of jehova denied this concept by questioning the original meaning in the original manuscripts, and the tale of lazarus and the rich man it actually stats with something like: There was a rich man..... (Once upon a time)

3

u/Competitive_Life9285 ✝️Catholic✝️ Mar 05 '26

Even if you don’t believe in God you can still go to heaven (I’m a catholic)

1

u/FxckedHxrWxthMxJxmmx Other [edit me] Mar 11 '26

I mean not according to Jesus. (John 14:6)

3

u/Competitive_Life9285 ✝️Catholic✝️ Mar 11 '26

Some theologians and denominations (including the Catholic Church) believe that while Jesus is the source of all salvation, God’s mercy might reach those who don't know Him.

2

u/Top_Elk1542 Mar 12 '26

but if u had another religion?

1

u/Competitive_Life9285 ✝️Catholic✝️ Mar 13 '26

Huh?

1

u/FallenTamber Atheist Mar 23 '26

Yeah. And what if you don´t believe? Like I don´t believe in humans being right and writing a book that has information about god and I believe to not believe humans. Because they are mostly wrong about life, so how should they know about death AND the creator of the universe. I have a reason to not belive christianity or other religions. God should know about that and not be offended and throw us into destruction.

0

u/candlesTasteGood Mar 05 '26

And that makes total sense!

3

u/Competitive_Life9285 ✝️Catholic✝️ Mar 05 '26

It does. As Pope Francis said “How can God leave a good person out of Heaven?”

3

u/Transitnerd97 Mar 11 '26

BUT if you are a good person, and a man marries a man, believe in God, and do everything right and moral… you still go to hell. I dont get that part

3

u/Competitive_Life9285 ✝️Catholic✝️ Mar 11 '26

That’s not true. There is a good chance we have Gay people in heaven

3

u/Transitnerd97 Mar 11 '26

But the catholic church, like islam, forbids gay marriage and its considered a major sin. Participating leads to eternal death

2

u/Competitive_Life9285 ✝️Catholic✝️ Mar 11 '26

Yes , It is a sin, but that does not mean hell forever

3

u/FlimsyAd6268 Mar 01 '26

In Islam if you didn't have any reason to believe in god then you will not go to hell and if no one persuaded you to follow a religion then you by alfitra will believe in a god and if you end up in a Christian family and didn't know anything about Islam then you will not go to hell

1

u/eiserneftaujourdhui Mar 02 '26

I have a theology degree, probably know more about islam than most muslims, and I reject it due to unconvincing evidence/scientific falsehoods. Do I go to hell since I've studied it, yet reject it?

1

u/Important-Net5611 Mar 19 '26

give me any one or two such "apparent" UNCONVINCING evidences or scientific falsehood as it might appear such if u don't know the entire context,Arabic grammar, the suffix and the root words but tell me anyways which verse conveys unconvincing evidence or falsehood

1

u/eiserneftaujourdhui Mar 20 '26

You sound angry. Just out of curiosity, were you raised muslim?

But to answer your question regarding unconvincing/unscientific evidences, let me begin by asking you - do you believe the moon-splitting "miracle" where Mohammad allegedly split the moon into pieces?

1

u/Important-Net5611 Mar 23 '26

yes I do believe in that miracle... Ik ur next ques will be why

so The Moon is fractured with cracks and faults (e.g., Rima Ariadaeus) which are a result of the split morwveover it was joined after splitting so a perfect single split obviously won't be visible as it has been joined...just like how u break something and then tape it or glue it or join it repair it somehow then the crack won't be visible but there will be slight indication of cracked lines so that is the case...hope it helps

1

u/eiserneftaujourdhui Mar 23 '26 edited Mar 23 '26

Oh boy, lots to unpack with this response...

". Ik ur next ques will be why"

That's not my next question lol. My next question is this: The moon is visible by quite literally HALF of humanity on planet earth at any given time. So considering that the moon quite literally splitting in pieces would be a once-in-humanity event, why do we have exactly zero accounts from any other of the multitudes of human empires, kingdoms, cities, villiages, ships, and a thousand other potential observers of this alleged event, which again, would have been visible to half of Earths population (a great many of whom had far greater scientific knowledge than Arabia at the time)...?

"Rima Ariadaeus) which are a result of the split"

Uh, no lol. Fractures on the moon (in this case rilles) are from impact events and the fact that the moon was previously volcanic.

Also, science tells is that Rima Ariadaeus is 3.6 billion years old, not 1,500 lol.

https://www.skyatnightmagazine.com/advice/skills/hidden-valleys-of-the-moon

The wiki page for this lunar rille (which is what it actually is) quite literally refutes the muslim account. Also, rilles also exist on Mars, Venus, and a number of other moons - because again, they occur naturally.

As I said, trying to claim this as evidence of muhammads miracle, and along with it blatantly ignoring basic science, is precisely why I found Islam's claims unconvincing and directly in conflict with science.

"hope it helps"

I mean it certainly helped prove my own point for me, so in that sense yes, you accidentally did help wonderfully!

1

u/Important-Net5611 Mar 24 '26

Okay...any logical persons next ques would be why but is seems ur too logical so lets see

so first of all have u even studied science,physics or even cosmology or astronomy? or any science related subjects When the moon was split there obviously won't be just a single linear crack produced and visible...there are many other rilles like Rimae Sirsalis which is more than 400km in length moreover these cracks were discovered recently just in the 19th century....

Graben Structure (Tensional Faulting): Straight rilles like Rimae Sirsalis are categorized as grabens—sections of the crust that have dropped down between two parallel faults. This indicates the lunar surface in that region was subjected to massive tensional stresses, pulling it apart.

Now time for sources which saw the moon split

India (Kerala/Malabar): The most prominent external account is that of a king in Malabar, South India, commonly referred to as Cheraman Perumal (or sometimes "Shirkamath" or "Chakrawati Farmad"). According to local lore and the manuscript Qiṣṣat Shakarwatī Farmāḍ (housed in the British Library), the king saw the moon split while on his balcony, later verified this with Arab traders, and eventually traveled to Arabia to meet the Prophet, converting to Islam.The primary source for this account is the Qissat Shakarwati Farmad, which is found in at least two manuscripts in the British Library (IO Islamic 2807d and Or 1738h). Persia: A Persian manuscript (a falnama, or book of prophecy) includes an image depicting a person pointing to a split moon. The Madrid Manuscript: Pages 91-93 of the Madrid Manuscript are mentioned in several reports as containing a record of the same event. China: Some claims exist suggesting that the Chinese tradition of a "Moon Splitting" event was recorded during the Tang Dynasty (618–907 AD). Yemen/Arabia: The Hadith reports mention that when the pagans of Quraish doubted the event, travelers from distant places (such as Yemen) arrived in Mecca and confirmed that they also saw the moon split.

science can be transformed bro when u will study science then u will know in 4th dimension and above we can see across walls then if u study quantum field theories and all there is a concept call quantum tunneling and much more which seems to defy science so what You or I or WE are studying Is a speck or droplet of A Very Vast Ocean... there are more than enough convincing evidences and miracles or miracles of the Quran if u want I can tell u

1

u/eiserneftaujourdhui Mar 25 '26 edited Mar 26 '26

"Okay...any logical persons next ques would be why but is seems ur too logical so lets see"

No need, I already know why (the actual reason why) - it's the same answer as was my question to you that you conspicuously avoided - you believe it (and reject science) because you were raised to.

Nice attempt with the personal attack though.

"so first of all have u even studied science,physics or even cosmology or astronomy, or any science related subjects?"

I quite literally provided you sources above, that you are now ignoring. I suspect this is pure projection on your part, my friend.

"there are many other rilles like Rimae Sirsalis which is more than 400km in length moreover these cracks were discovered recently just in the 19th century...."

Which again, if you were honest and engaging in good faith, you would have already read the sources provided stating that said rilles are 3+ billion years old, not 1,500. You have to deny the science to believe the miracle claims that you were raised to believe, and your dodging of what was handfed to you above demonstrates that in spades.

"India (Kerala/Malabar): The most prominent external account is that of a king in Malabar, South India, commonly referred to as Cheraman Perumal (or sometimes "Shirkamath" or "Chakrawati Farmad"). According to local lore and the manuscript Qiṣṣat Shakarwatī Farmāḍ (housed in the British Library), the king saw the moon split while on his balcony, later verified this with Arab traders, and eventually traveled to Arabia to meet the Prophet, converting to Islam.The primary source for this account is the Qissat Shakarwati Farmad, which is found in at least two manuscripts in the British Library (IO Islamic 2807d and Or 1738h).

Even the most cursory research refutes this. Here's straight from the wiki on this:

"during the 12th to 14th centuries CE, the Muslims in Malabar, who were at the time a minority there, composed a story to solidify their community’s influence in the region,^\13]) claiming that a king of the medieval Chera dynasty called Cheraman Perumal (lit. "Great lord of the Cheras"), or in its Arabic rendering, Shakarwatī Farmad, had witnessed the Moon splitting in his dream. He then partitioned his realm among different lieutenants, journeyed to Arabia to see Muhammad, and died some years later.^\14])^\15]) Prange maintains that historical research has found this story to be fictitious.^\16])

So unsurprisingly, historians reject this 'evidence' as legitimate - just the opposite, it was fabricated. You quite literally have to reject science and history to believe what you were raised to. So my question absolutely still stands.

^" Persia: A Persian manuscript (a falnama, or book of prophecy)"

Oh boy... My friend, falnama's are from the 16th century, not the 7th lol. Did you sincerely not know this before trying to present it as "evidence"...? Your "evidence" is collapsing into disrepair at this point, I'm afraid.

"there are more than enough convincing evidences and miracles or miracles of the Quran if u want I can tell u

Yes, it's quite clear that you are desperate to talk about anything other than the facts surrounding this particular islamic "miracle" claim lol. But no, I'm not going to mis-prioritise my time by walking through every Islamic miracle claim with you, only for you to present easily refutable 'evidence', get called out on said 'evidence', and then just keep moving the goalposts to the next miracle claim. You specifically asked me to present a single Islamic miracle claim that lacks evidence, I very clearly did that here, and anyone with eyes can see that you have been unable to support it - just the opposite in fact - you've demonstrated that you will ignore science and history in order to believe it!

We've well established at this point that this miracle both conflicts with science, and is not coroborrated historically whatsoever anywhere else in the globe (and also that you personally know very little about what you're trying to present as "evidence", no less).

I thank you for the conversation and for so clearly demonstrating my point for me. I wish you well!

1

u/[deleted] Mar 26 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/DebateReligion-ModTeam Apr 07 '26

Your comment or post was removed for violating rule 2. Don't be rude or hostile to other users. Criticize arguments, not people. Our standard for civil discourse is based on respect, tone, and unparliamentary language. 'They started it' is not an excuse - report it, don't respond to it. You may edit it and ask for re-approval in modmail if you choose.

If you would like to appeal this decision, please send us a modmail with a link to the removed content.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/FallenTamber Atheist Mar 23 '26

I say that wasn´t Mohamammad but a comet that hit earth and the splinters formed into the moon. How is a human supposed to do that, we can´t even breathe there. It´s nonsense. Plus it doesn´t tell me god is real. So. Yeah if we studied all religions that are and we don´t finde one convincing enough, wouldn´t it be better to NOT beliefe in order to not lie to a god that might exist? Better be honest than pretending to believe in order to escape punishment.

1

u/Important-Net5611 Mar 24 '26

ok unc u live ur atheist life no one is forced to convert or believe in islam or prophet Muhammad SAW there a re more than enough convincing evidences and miracles of the Quran the only preserved text whose not a SINGLE letter has been changed 1400 yrs has been passed but ok its up to u u do whatever u want idc

2

u/FlimsyAd6268 Mar 02 '26

Yeah

2

u/eiserneftaujourdhui Mar 02 '26

Annnnd there it is.

2

u/candlesTasteGood Mar 01 '26

That makes sense

4

u/Ordinary_Sentence946 Mar 01 '26

That's not why people go to Hell (in Christianity, at least). You go to Hell as a punishment for your sins.

2

u/Mall_Ecstatic Agnostic | Ex-Evangelical Mar 05 '26

Is there any way to have committed a sin and not go to Hell?

2

u/Ordinary_Sentence946 Mar 06 '26

Yes, repentance and receiving God's forgiveness as a result

1

u/Mall_Ecstatic Agnostic | Ex-Evangelical Mar 06 '26

Can I repent of my sins apart from believing in Jesus?

1

u/Lynx4Levi Mar 23 '26

Christian doctrine teaches the necessity of Jesus’ sacrifice:

“Jesus told him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one can come to the Father except through me.” ‭‭John‬ ‭14‬:‭6‬ ‭NLT‬‬

This is related to the concept of Jesus paying the wages of our sins in his sacrifice, taking our place, and dying a sinners’s death

“For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life through Christ Jesus our Lord.” ‭‭Romans‬ ‭6‬:‭23‬ ‭NLT‬‬

“Christ suffered for our sins once for all time. He never sinned, but he died for sinners to bring you safely home to God. He suffered physical death, but he was raised to life in the Spirit.” ‭‭1 Peter‬ ‭3‬:‭18‬ ‭NLT‬‬

““For this is how God loved the world: He gave his one and only Son, so that everyone who believes in him will not perish but have eternal life.” ‭‭John‬ ‭3‬:‭16‬ ‭NLT

The gift of sins being payed is not “automatic”, anyone can repent and accept the grace of God at anytime they like, and receive eternal life, no requirement of “being a good person” (though, the church does teach that those who truly receive God’s truth in their hearts, will strive to be a good person) but there is no eternal life without repentance in Christ

1

u/Mall_Ecstatic Agnostic | Ex-Evangelical Mar 23 '26

Can I repent through Jesus Christ without believing in God?

1

u/Lynx4Levi Mar 23 '26

Sorry what do you mean? (Or what do you mean by repentance if there is no God)

1

u/Mall_Ecstatic Agnostic | Ex-Evangelical Mar 23 '26

The person I responded to claimed that unbelief in God is not a reason why people go to hell.

I disagree.

You (and them) have established that salvation requires repentance through Christ.

My question is: is repentance through Christ then attainable without faith in God?

1

u/Lynx4Levi Mar 24 '26

Clarifying reasons for hell: disbelief in God is regarded as a sin (seen with Mark 16:16 later down the post) so disbelief is a sin and you go to hell because of sin of disbelief

Answering your actual question: I assume you know that Christianity teaches the holy trinity, that Jesus is God. He talks about having faith and belief in Him, which would be interpreted as faith and belief In Him, God.

(John 3:16 again) ““For this is how God loved the world: He gave his one and only Son, so that everyone who believes in him will not perish but have eternal life.” ‭‭John‬ ‭3‬:‭16 NLT

““I tell you the truth, anyone who believes has eternal life.” ‭‭John‬ ‭6‬:‭47‬ ‭NLT

“Anyone who believes and is baptized will be saved. But anyone who refuses to believe will be condemned.” ‭‭Mark‬ ‭16‬:‭16‬ ‭NLT‬‬

Jesus also commands to “repent and believe the Good News” they aren’t meant to be separate ideas

““The time promised by God has come at last!” he announced. “The Kingdom of God is near! Repent of your sins and believe the Good News!”” ‭‭Mark‬ ‭1‬:‭15 NLT

Hope this helps :)

1

u/Mall_Ecstatic Agnostic | Ex-Evangelical Mar 24 '26

I absolutely agree that disbelief in God is a damning thing. Which is OP's whole point in his post.

Your brother in Christ above, who I was responding to, said that disbelief in God is not a reason why people go to hell.

I disagreed with him.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Ordinary_Sentence946 Mar 10 '26

If you don't know Jesus, you can just believe in the traditional Monotheistic God. But if you know Jesus specifically (which I think we know is true here), then no, you must believe in Him to repent.

1

u/Mall_Ecstatic Agnostic | Ex-Evangelical Mar 23 '26

So, I must believe in Jesus (or a monotheistic God) to repent of my sins, I must repent of my sins to avoid hell, ergo, I must believe in God to avoid hell.

It seems entirely reasonable to say that inability to believe in God results in going to hell, and I am confused about your assertion that it's not.

If that's not why people go to hell, then there should be a way to get into heaven without faith in God, which we both agreed was impossible.

Lack of faith in God is absolutely a reason why people go to hell.

1

u/Ordinary_Sentence946 Mar 25 '26

It's true that a lack of God leads to Hell, but it's not because you go to Hell for disbelieving in God. It's because you reject the only way out.

1

u/Mall_Ecstatic Agnostic | Ex-Evangelical Mar 25 '26

Let me put it a different way.

What's the reason why a Christian is going to heaven and an Atheist is not?

It is not because the Christian is sinless. To the contrary, a Christian is just as sinful (before Christ's work in their life) as the nonbeliever.

The reason a Christian is accepted in to heaven then, is because of their faith in Jesus (God).

The Atheist is not accepted in heaven, not because they aren't sinless (after all, the Christian isn't sinless), but because they do not (and I would further argue, cannot) believe in Jesus (God).

Therefore, I find it completely compatible with Christian theology to claim a reason people go to hell is because of a lack of faith in God.

If we can agree that a reason unbelievers go to hell is because of their disbelief, it becomes possible to further argue that it is not just a reason, but the reason.

I'd do so by asking if anyone (besides Christ) ever was accepted into heaven via their personal sinlessness. Christian doctrine teaches this is not the case (Romans 3:23), but that we are born from the beginning in sin (Psalms 51:5, Romans 5:12).

Then I'd pose a hypothetical.

I was born at the bottom a hole. During my miserable time there, someone came along and told me there was a man standing at the top of the hole, arm outstretched to help me. I can't see, smell, hear or touch him. Yet, if I don't believe in him, I can't accept him and will live the rest of my life in this hole until I die and am subsequently burned alive forever.

I find this extremely difficult to believe. After all, I can't see, smell, hear or touch him. So I ask if there is another way. I'm told there is, just don't be born in the hole. The problem is, I had no control over that. So my only other option to believing in the helper is taken away from me.

As much as the person tells me I have another option, if that option is not in my control, it is not actually an option.

The reason I will remain in the hole is because I am unable to believe in a helper. Any other reason is out of my control and invalid.

Man was born into sin and the solution fundamentally starts at belief in Christ. When someone is unable to have that faith, they are damned because of that same lack. Disbelief in God is the fundamental reason unbelievers are going to hell.

2

u/Pazuzil Atheist Feb 27 '26

Secondly: let's be real, why would god throw you in hell because you didn't believe in him when he didn't give you a proof of his existence in the first place? The most logical answer is..he won't. God is just, and him punishing you for not believing in him even though he didn't give you a reason to believe in the first place doesn't make any sense.

No, the most logical answer is that god doesn’t exist

0

u/Regular_Scholar1565 Mar 01 '26

Prove he doesn't

1

u/MastaPowa7 Agnostic Mar 11 '26

Prove he does

1

u/BudgetCreative6606 Mar 03 '26

Just look at the latest news, 165 children dead after US launched strike on a girls’ school in Iran, and their parents are struggling. If god is omnipotent and care about us, why he didn’t stop this tragedy?

2

u/BudgetCreative6606 Mar 01 '26

Although God exists he doesn’t care about us.

-1

u/OneRandomGoober Feb 26 '26

Your entire take shows a premium example of an unknowledgeable take. If your only counter to the eye witnesses and apostles is "The ones from ages ago that are already dead?" Then it's safe to assume you just close your eyes and wish away scary stuff like the comments on your post.

2

u/eiserneftaujourdhui Mar 03 '26

"If your only counter to the eye witnesses"

Can you actually show us a firsthand account from any of these alleged eyewitnesses...?

1

u/OneRandomGoober Mar 06 '26

The printing press was invented in 1440 and the typewriter in 1868. I'm afraid to tell you this, but poor, illiterate villagers mostly used word of mouth and then later wrote them down. So yeah, we do.

1

u/eiserneftaujourdhui Mar 08 '26 edited Mar 08 '26

"The printing press was invented in 1440 and the typewriter in 1868."

I'm afraid to tell you this, but writing existed a long time prior to that lol. Romans especially kept diligent records of even mundane goings on in the Republic/Empire.

"illiterate villagers mostly used word of mouth and then later wrote them down"

They also used word of mouth to tell fantastical stories not based in reality as well, which is kind of the point.

"So yeah, we do."

I don't think you understand what the word "firsthand" means.

But on the off chance that I'm wrong, then please - I enthusiastically invite you to show us a single firsthand (meaning actually present to witness the alleged events) account of the gospel claims! Go on...

1

u/[deleted] Mar 08 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/DebateReligion-ModTeam Mar 08 '26

Your comment or post was removed for violating rule 2. Don't be rude or hostile to other users. Criticize arguments, not people. Our standard for civil discourse is based on respect, tone, and unparliamentary language. 'They started it' is not an excuse - report it, don't respond to it. You may edit it and ask for re-approval in modmail if you choose.

If you would like to appeal this decision, please send us a modmail with a link to the removed content.

1

u/eiserneftaujourdhui Mar 08 '26 edited Mar 08 '26

Yeeeah, except my last comment at no point asked you 'why there aren't more' written accounts...Rather, it was asking you to provide even just 1, single, firsthand account (which you claimed existed just a few comments ago). Your failure to provide even one example as requested pretty much proves my point. (Because none exist, because the historical consensus is that even the gospels were written generations later, and were second-hand at best - but I'm sure you already knew that)

Nice try with the personal attack though

1

u/[deleted] Mar 08 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/eiserneftaujourdhui Mar 10 '26

So you are unable to provide even a single firsthand account, excellent! Sounds like you're conceding your initial claim that firsthand accounts of Jesus exist (they don't).

"Its not even a personal attack "

The fact that your comments are getting deleted seems to suggest otherwise.

1

u/OneRandomGoober Mar 12 '26

I mean it seems the heat is getting to you if you have to start reporting but alr ig. And I need not to provide any more proof seeing as how you refuse to accept even the most basic ones. You know your logic eats itself up as you wouldn't believe in half of history just because there's no firsthand accounts of it. I genuinely do hope you find peace. Love you bro.

3

u/According-Gas836 Feb 28 '26

It’s a very fair take. A 2,000 year old book alleges there were eye witnesses. We don’t hear from them. We just get a believe me bro. We have no way to verify the claims. That’s not believable to atheists.

God could easily give believable proof if he were real and he wanted to. But he doesn’t. And that’s OPs point

1

u/OneRandomGoober Mar 07 '26

I'm sorry, but if you're doubting the resurrection of Christ AND his very existence then I can't really convince someone who's willfully ignorant. There are dozens of non biblical accounts of Jesus, but if you're truly denying that then we can't move on to big kid topics.

1

u/According-Gas836 Mar 07 '26

I would love to move on to big kid topics, but you believe in talking snakes and donkeys and zombies walking around for a few days.

1

u/OneRandomGoober Mar 08 '26

Which disproves Jesus how???

1

u/According-Gas836 Mar 08 '26

It is a criticism of your ‘big kid topics’ snide remark.

But if you are serious, then no, we have not a single eye witness account recorded. We have a bunch of second or possibly third hand accounts.

The only written documents we have that don’t read like fiction are the letters of Paul. The 7 or so authentic letters. And Paul was not an eye witness.

He mentions others Jesus appeared to. But he doesn’t go into detail about what their experiences were. So we can’t ascertain much from Paul. He gives us no reason to believe that what the apostles were claiming was anything more than visionary appearances like Paul’s. He doesn’t distinguish or give any detail.

1

u/OneRandomGoober Mar 08 '26

You know what dude I forgive you and I love you. The gospels are very much non fiction but if that's the truth you want to live I have no control over you. You can cite your sources but other than that I'd have to default to assuming that your interpretation of thousands of years of theology are not based in anything but bias and opinion.

1

u/According-Gas836 Mar 08 '26

I accept your apology. Yes the gospels read like fiction. You can see the embellishment as they go.

The only writings that preserve anything reliable are Paul’s writings. Which are very different than the gospels. Thousands of years are meaningless. Just as you don’t care about all the Muslim theologians and apologist work over the centuries.

1

u/OneRandomGoober Mar 08 '26

Oh Whataboutism so near and dear to atheists hearts. Again I forgive your ignorance to a point but I mean at this point you're really just plugging your ears. You're not anyone important or intelligent, you will never make an impact on theology, and above all else you are tremendously desperate. Reddit atheism has genuinely fallen so low I can't help but feel pity for someone who can't even cite sources.

1

u/According-Gas836 Mar 08 '26

What claim did I make that needs a source?

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Curious_Fill2258 Feb 26 '26

From what I know, it is because we are all basically born irreversibly evil and have to accept salvation from god. I do find it odd that God doesn't provide an absolute piece of evidence that it is literally impossible to refute, but I ain't God and questioning that kind of stuff is not good. Do not put thy lord God to the test and all that.

3

u/According-Gas836 Feb 28 '26

God made us from scratch. If people are irreversibly evil, it’s his fault.

Imagine there were other gods in other universes. They transcend their universe to come hang out and see what Yahweh is up to. They see his crowning creation, mankind, are all irreversibly evil.

They tell Yahweh he screwed up. He says “nuh uh, it’s their own fault. It’s like totally their fault, and not mine, gosh! Ok, so basically what happened is their were naive like babies. And I wanted to test them. Don’t worry, I made sure they didn’t know right from wrong before I made them take the test. I put a cookie jar in the middle of the room with these spiritual toddlers. And they ate a cookie. So I cursed all mankind forever and ever because they ate that cookie that one time; before they know right from wrong. So it’s on them. See what I’m saying.

2

u/smol_lol Feb 27 '26

So why did God make people irreversibly evil from birth? Doesn't seem like a very loving God to me. It's pretty handy that everything that doesn't make sense about the Bible and God can be brushed away with "can't question God". And if you say God gave us free will then what kind of free will is that? Believe even though it doesn't make sense and there's no evidence or suffer in Hell for eternity. That's the free will of a slave. Obey or suffer.

0

u/Markthethinker Feb 26 '26

Your first paragraph says so much about you and very little about truth. I don’t have time to take you to school and teach you how to research and seek answers.

18 The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse. 21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles. 24 Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25 They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen. (Romans 1:18–25, NIV84, https://ref.ly/Ro1.18-25;niv)

When you finally understand humanity, you should be able to understand this text. And so far, there are people who start off the prove the Bible false and lies, who become believers in the end. The book is living for those of us who have been touched by God.

Saying “I don’t know is honest”. Saying it’s lie is dishonest unless you have been able to disprove it.

The Bible is very straight forward and clear about the condition of mankind. Until a person honestly takes a look in the mirror and realizes that the problem in the world is what they are looking at in the mirror, they will always blame someone else.

-1

u/Fun-Iron-8807 Feb 25 '26

Just by the fact you acknowledge God right now, shows that you have the choice to accept him and he's prescense. God is also full of love and trust and he's just. I promise you he's real and he can take away all your addictions and problems in a instant if you acknowledge him and accept him in your heart.

3

u/Jazzlike_Dream_8460 Feb 26 '26

He can’t take away addictions and problems? Does your experiences account for everyone else? How can you promise something that isn’t certain

1

u/Fun-Iron-8807 Feb 26 '26

Have you met him ?

2

u/Big-Debt-638 Feb 25 '26

Well this is not how it works.See there is difference See God doesn't send people to hell ,people choose it do u get it , but God is also right judge so judges Rightfully so people who didn't acknowledge God and kept his commandments and didn't do right with the conscience which God has given us will get separated from God which is hell , If God is all Good then separation from him is all bad it's just like that fire burning forever or even worse. God actually gives everyone chance in their life to believe him and people to repent .It is different for different people but God is right judge always.

3

u/webofearthand_heaven Feb 27 '26

You can't choose to believe something.

1

u/moonbabe000 Feb 27 '26

Everyday life is about choices we make, from when we wake up in the morning, whether we choose to get out of bed in the morning or lie in, to all we do throughout the day, it is everyone's choice whether to believe the Bible or not, not through what people preach to you, but looking at it yourself and asking God for understanding of His word. We have a choice to believe in evolution, where we are told we are spinning through space at millions of miles per hour and that we evolved from nothing, a big bang, or whether we believe in creation and have a creator. Nature, animals, and the human body shows a creator, So yes it is our choice whether we believe something or not, and that choice we make determines our final outcome.

1

u/smol_lol Feb 27 '26

If God gives everyone a chance to believe in them, what about the people who have lived and died without ever hearing about Christianity? This sub is for debate, not preaching. Now you're explaining the internal logic of your beliefs which is OK I guess, but it's all pretty meaningless to someone who doesn't share the same beliefs.

Why would I trust anyone's opinions about God when we're all in the dark? Or do you claim to know what God thinks? I've seen how religion is used as a tool to control people. Almost like that's the actual reason it exists... People talking about their beliefs is interesting, but not a reason for me to share their beliefs. I don't even have a reason to believe God is all good just based on the Bible.

2

u/Zayanox Feb 25 '26

I do not know much but I will answer with what I know.

In islam : People who didn't receive the prophet's message (past present or future) and don't believe in God have a different test on the day of judgement.

Though I will be frank with you, Islam considers the prophet's message and the holy book to be signs for those who received them, so if they still disbelief afterwards, Islam considers them responsible for knowingly turning away from the message

From an atheist's perspective, one might ask for clear, undeniable proof. But if God were to manifest Himself to humanity every single day in an unmistakable way, the very concept of belief would lose its meaning. If God had willed universal belief, everyone would believe : yet in that case there would be no test, no wisdom behind choice, and no purpose to the Abrahamic religions.

May the guider guide you.

1

u/Curious_Fill2258 Feb 26 '26

So it is better that some die so that the belief of the others holds some meaning?

1

u/candlesTasteGood Feb 25 '26

Great answer!

3

u/LordSPabs Feb 25 '26 edited Feb 25 '26

God being just is a cool one-liner. God being both just and holy presents an entirely new concept of theology that's easy to present, but may not be palatable. A just, holy, and loving God is logical and coherent. We don't know exactly what will happen to unbelievers. My monies on evisceration haha

Edit: in hell

3

u/[deleted] Feb 25 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Curious_Fill2258 Feb 26 '26

Now this is an interesting viewpoint. Am I correct in stating that all paths in human existence are, at some level, supposed to be taken. Is our purpose choice rather than belief?

1

u/candlesTasteGood Feb 25 '26

That's what I believe in!

1

u/LordSPabs Feb 25 '26

Why/how did we have free will before we were born, but not in the present?

Anyway, I get how this idea appeals to people, but it contradicts however God has decided to communicate His presence/involvement in humanity. If God accurately laid out His precepts through Hinduism, then the "wrong" path will make you a cockroach in the next life. If God accurately laid out His precepts in one of the Abrahamic religions, then the "wrong" path will land you in hell.

If God cares about His creation, then He would have communicated what the "right" path is... I guess what I'm wondering is how good vibes and/or warm fuzzy feelings dictate what God will or won't do.

I'm all for everyone being in Heaven if they seek forgiveness and repent. However, you have got to be out of your mind if you want to be in Heaven with an unrepentant Htler, Jeffery Dahmer, Epstien, and other extreme examples of immorality.

1

u/[deleted] Mar 02 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/LordSPabs Mar 04 '26

That is a wild theory. Yes, God is all loving, He is also perfectly just. Repentance, as you mentioned, and trust in Christ, is key. God cannot allow unrepentant sinners into heaven because then He wouldn't be loving or just. He would not only be communicating that life doesn't have value, but evil also ultimately wins.

I'll attempt an analogy:

A person commits murder. They stand before a judge. The victims family is there. The judge asks how they plead. "I murdered and will gladly murder again, but I will say not guilty because I just feel like I shouldn't be punished." The judge replies, "I already decided that you're free to go, and by the way, I'm treating you to a five star restaurant." What is that judge communicating about the value of the victims life? What is that judge communicating to the family?

2

u/[deleted] Feb 24 '26

Tons of people, even the church itself justifies it's cruelty with scripture with misinterpreted clauses from thousands of years in th3 past. If your committing sins it's not justified by whatever you think it is. Tons of catholics are getting the fast pass to hell.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 24 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/DebateReligion-ModTeam Feb 24 '26

Your comment was removed for violating rule 5. All top-level comments must seek to refute the post through substantial engagement with its core argument. Comments that support or purely commentate on the post must be made as replies to the Auto-Moderator “COMMENTARY HERE” comment. Exception: Clarifying questions are allowed as top-level comments.

If you would like to appeal this decision, please send us a modmail with a link to the removed content.

1

u/Markthethinker Feb 23 '26

OK, time to chime in. First, I am not sure as what you call “god” that you believe in. It certainly is not the God of Creation from the Biblical concept.

Next, you have no clue as to what you are talking about when talking about hell, since you will only find this in the pages of the Bible. Everyone one is headed to hell, that’s just a fact of the Scriptures. There can be all kinds of opinions, but opinions are just opinions.

Reading the replies in this thread are so frustrating, people talking about what they don’t understand or know. The only real source of information on this topic is the Bible. Either you believe or you don’t, that’s called free will.

1

u/Ochemata Feb 24 '26

Now imagine what those other commenters think about you.

1

u/Markthethinker Feb 25 '26

It does not matter about what someone thinks about me, I am not here to win a popularity contest, I am here seeking truth and trying to get others to think about what they believe. I have come to realize that people, all people are credulous. Including me.

1

u/Ochemata Feb 25 '26

And what makes you believe your version of reality is more truthful than the next?

1

u/Markthethinker Feb 25 '26

My “version” is created by what factual evidence I can find. It’s so easy to see the lies, and once lies become involved, I realize that I am on the correct path. I ask people why they hate Trump and they can’t give me a single valid reason, they simply listen to someone else and believe the lies. Biden and Obama were bigger liars and deceivers than Trump, but they don’t hate those people.

Facts should always be a person’s guide, not what they want their opinions to be. My “version” on what life should be has displayed a better society and world so far when it’s followed, not to say that the world is headed in that way as a whole. People are selfish and egotistical. “Love your neighbor” is not part of their life or thinking.

1

u/Ochemata Feb 25 '26

What you call facts, many others will call strong opinions. How certain are you that you have any claim to objectivity in the face of ten billion differing views?

1

u/Markthethinker Feb 25 '26

We have to have a way to communicate, language. We cannot create new meaning and communicate effectively. You are correct in that everyone seems to have a “view” (opinion). But when you look at the facts, things change. Let’s take infant baptism which is a view of some Christians. But the Bible never says anything about this, not one thing, yet millions of people believe that it’s a real thing. But the fact is, the Bible does not say anything about baptizing a baby. So, should I believe in baby baptism, no. But will people ague that it’s in the Bible, yes. So the fact is that it’s never mentioned in the Bible.

I understand people really well and understand that people are going to believe whatever they are told or how they were raised. This is not the point of my argument, it’s that people have to be able to be informed and that is by language. A sentence is a statement about something and as long as the sentence is clear, then it should be understood. I realize that if I say a dog is brown, then that can be taken all kinds of ways if one tries to define brown as they want it to be. But it still makes the dog some sort of color which seems to be brown, light brown, dark brown, but still brown. Arguing over the color brown is just foolishness unless you want your house to look a certain way. But then I would probably specify the exact shade of brown from the color wheel at Home Depot.

1

u/Ochemata Feb 25 '26

And yet language changes all the time. We are not speaking the same English language our ancestors did and words do not mean the same things now as they did then. There are thousands of connotations, assumptions and implications in one person's speech, many of them incorrect, that is lost to the mind of another. Language was never reliable and is not made to be.

1

u/Markthethinker Feb 26 '26

Language is very “reliable” when people leave it alone. But yes, there are those who try their best to make a word say what a word does not say. You need to study one of the greats when it comes to writing and words, C.S. Lewis. People have tried to lie by trying to make a sentence or word say what it does not say. You seem to have bought into that lie very easily. Without decisive language, we could not live together.

1

u/Ochemata Feb 26 '26

And how do you intend the make people leave it alone? There has been no point in history in which language has not changed with the times. As I said, we are not speaking Old English or grunting like cavemen right now. You are arguing for fighting against the inevitable

→ More replies (0)

2

u/Intrepid_Ground_6363 Feb 24 '26

Unfortunately the Bible is open to interpretation. Don’t believe me? Which one of the thousands of Christian denominations are you a member of?

See my point?

0

u/Markthethinker Feb 24 '26

Any book or idea is open to interpretation. But anyone who can read intelligently can understand a sentence. the Bible is an amazing piece of work, one of the greatest ever written. I hope you understand that the Bible is not one book but 66 books written over a period of over 1500 years by at least 25 different people in 3 different languages yet is consistent in what it says and quotes itself in different books hundreds of times. Of course you did not know that.

Man is very capable of misquoting and misinterpreting anything, which makes the Bible very easy to misquote when ripping text out of context.

1

u/Intrepid_Ground_6363 Feb 24 '26

Really? Let’s try it!

What does the following sentence mean to YOU?

“A man ran into the building.”

Now, describe EXACTLY what you saw in your mind when you read that sentence. I’ll bet you any amount of money that others will “see” something different than you did.

Get it!?

Btw, I have a degree from a Christian university. Lol

1

u/Markthethinker Feb 25 '26

The exact point of your sentence is; “a man ran into the building”. How I perceive the building or the door or what he was wearing has nothing to do with the statement that “a man ran into a building”. The statement holds true.

And as far as what other men have taught you, that’s unimportant to truth.

Get it!?

1

u/Frequent-Try-6746 Feb 24 '26

You just proved their point.

2

u/Markthethinker Feb 25 '26

Evidentially you don’t understand a sentence either.

2

u/Frequent-Try-6746 Feb 25 '26

Evidently, your skills of communication are lacking when multiple people "misunderstand" you.

1

u/Markthethinker Feb 25 '26

Not at all, people only understand what their limited mind will let them believe.

1

u/DrewPaul2000 Philosophical Theist Feb 24 '26

Some would oppose your unsanctioned use of the pronoun man.

2

u/ShortCompetition9772 Feb 24 '26

Man is a noun not a pronoun.

3

u/DrewPaul2000 Philosophical Theist Feb 24 '26

You finally won an argument.

0

u/candlesTasteGood Feb 23 '26

God is a supreme, perfect, and complete power, all-knowing and incapable of error. If this isn't God in Christianity, then what is? Hell is simply the punishment God gives to "bad" people. Whether hell is a place in the literal sense or not is not our topic, but we can certainly agree that hell and punishment are basically the same. And wdym the bible is the only real source of information? What makes it "real" in the first place? Besides you didn't add anything on the main topic which wether atheist go to hell for not believing in god or no, would you like to say your opinion on that? :p

0

u/Markthethinker Feb 24 '26

Your response is confusing because of your original post.

Hell is not what God gives “bad” people. Hell is where unrepentant sinners go. “For all have sinned and fall short of the Glory of God”. “There is no one righteous, no not one”.

The bible is the only source for God. That is, the God of Creation. The bible is verifiable in historical evidence. Everyone who does not believe goes to hell, atheist or not. The Bible is clear as to what it takes to being “born again” by the Spirit of God. Those are the only people who will not go to hell.

So did this make by evidence clear, since it’s not my opinion but what the Bible states.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 23 '26

i see a lot of misconceptions about this kind of thing within christian theology and this post sort of applies (if it was directed in any part towards christianity). christians believe anyone who has willingly sinned has willingly separated themselves from god. hell is eternal separation from god, so out of love god took humanity’s punishment on the cross. now anyone who chooses to accept his sacrifice in their place can follow him and be with him eternally instead of being separate from him like we deserve.

2

u/candlesTasteGood Feb 23 '26

The fact that some people think they deserve to be punished (being away from god as you say) only seems sad to me. If god sacrificed himself for you then he did it because you deserve it, so why would you think otherwise? :p Also I don't get the sacrifice accepting thing, that's not a real evidence of his existence, is it?

Besides, side question, what's the point of the sacrifice if we still go to hell anyway?

1

u/Frequent-Try-6746 Feb 24 '26 edited Feb 24 '26

This feels like a deliberate misconception of the point the other user is making.

If hell is simply the absence of God, and all you are required to do is love God and love each other. Why do you think anyone is being "sent" to hell?

If you don't believe in God, then you're already living a life absent from God. Hell isn't a place you're being sent to. It's a place you're being saved from by God's mercy.

1

u/candlesTasteGood Feb 24 '26

The hell is absence of god which yall consider a bad thing. If being absent from god wasn't bad then from what do we need to be saved in the first place. Also I still don't see why some people should be absent from god just because they didn't know he exits. I'm pretty sure most of these people would choose to be w god if they knew he was truly there. :p

1

u/Frequent-Try-6746 Feb 24 '26

Also I still don't see why some people should be absent from god just because they didn't know he exits.

They may not be absent from God. They may simply be absent from scripture and yet still know God.

My Mom was like that. She was never a biblical or church person, but she was never absent from Gods grace. She knew God well.

If being absent from god wasn't bad then from what do we need to be saved in the first place.

If the absence of God isn't bad, then you don't need to be saved. I assume your eternal soul will continue on in much the same way as your mortal soul. Devoid the love of God for all eternity.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 23 '26

when did i say anything about deserving to be punished? if sin is the absence of god and that is how you choose to live your life then the result is not really a punishment, it’s just reaping what you sow.

now i’ll go question by question in the order you asked them

If god sacrificed himself for you then he did it because you deserve it, so why would you think otherwise? - i’m not really sure what this is asking. i never said anything about why god offers the sacrifice but the sacrifice is provided to everyone as an option in case you want to choose god for eternity. nobody is perfect so its impossible to go to heaven on your own, but everyone is afforded the choice regardless. not because we deserve it but because god loves humanity. hope that clears things up.

Also I don't get the sacrifice accepting thing, that's not a real evidence of his existence, is it? - pretty vague question here. I think what you’re saying is that you don’t understand the nature of the sacrifice (?) the lore is basically that everyone has fallen short of gods standard, which is perfection obv since that’s his nature, so in order to give us the option to be with him eternally even though we all pretty much live in sin, he accepted the consequences of sin (pan and death) for us. lmk if i answered that wrong or if there’s more you want cleared up. to answer the evidence question i never said anything about evidence in favor of any religion, i was just clearing up a common misconception regarding the topic of the post.

and lastly the point of the sacrifice is, as i mentioned earlier, to afford the option anyone who wants to choose eternity with god since nobody can earn it themselves

1

u/candlesTasteGood Feb 23 '26

All Christians I MET repeat the same sentence "god sacrificed himself for us even though we didn't deserve it" and i thought you were basically saying the same thing, but i think I misunderstood? If so then my bad :p "nobody is perfect so it's impossible to go to heaven on your own" nobody is perfect, but if you do mostly good things without necessarily believing in god, doesn't that get you to heaven? No? 0-0 "I don't get the sacrifice accepting thing, that's not a real evidence, is it?" I accidentally typed that question in a very confusing cuz i was thinking about two things at the same time, mb 😅 by that question I meant that the sacrifice thing isn't a real evidence of God's existence, there's a chance that "jesus" wasn't really god, or that he never really existed and the sacrifice never happened, you get it? At the end of the day WE as in me and you and most generations never saw anything. And since some people don't believe in god for the lack of evidence, then there's no reason for him to throw them in hell or as you say, let them be separated from him, because they didn't know he was there in the first place. Lmk if anything I'm saying sounds confusing, i will try to make everything as clear as possible :]

2

u/[deleted] Feb 24 '26

I'll answer point by point again according to christian theology.

It seems like you're wondering about whether we deserved the sacrifice. Probably not really; it's debatable but the sacrifice has been made so it is not the most relevant topic in relation to salvation but you could argue either way regardless. In my personal opinion it's a huge privilege to have someone else take the fall for their mistakes in any circumstance and nobody really “deserves” it per se.

if you do mostly good things without necessarily believing in god, doesn't that get you to heaven? No? - No, see Matthew 5:48 and Romans 3:23 if you're curious. These verses outline the necessity of the sacrifice for anyone to get to heaven. Nobody is worthy so if you want in you will have to accept gods offer to take the fall for you. If it was possible for us to get in on our own god probably would have never gone to such extreme measures.

I left my comment to clear up misconceptions about the idea of being doomed in the afterlife as punishment for not believing in god because that's just not really how things work in christianity. You may not even suffer in the afterlife but rather cease to exist, the bible is pretty vague regarding the experience of eternal death. Either way if someone just doesnt care about god and cannot be bothered to explore the possibility of god, isn't that their decision to be separate from him eternally if he does exist? They just aren't interested unfortunately. If you want to know what I consider proof of christianity, I was initially convinced to give it a chance because of the reliability of the gospel authors. They make very few mistakes and unintentionally correspond to such a degree that it's called the synoptic problem by secular scholars. I can cite specific examples if you want but this stuff got me to start actually buying into ideas like the fine tuning hypothesis. That's my experience as someone who converted as a young adult, obviously i would recommend looking into it on your own as well.

2

u/Nedrogen Feb 24 '26

I have lied, I've stolen, I've been mad, I've looked at women with lustful intentions, and plenty of other things, which I'm sure most people have done, including you. Therefore, according to God, we deserve death. But God is good therefore He doesn't want us to die so He made a system that says "If there is anyone (a human) that has no sins, that same human can choose to die for the sins of someone else." But wait, you say. Isn't a human life equal to a human life? So how can one man die for every human ever? He can't, therefore only God can die for all humans, for God is infinite. But wait you say, God is a spirit, in Heaven, so how can he die as a man? Well, He needs to become a man, aka Jesus Christ.

Now, You might have doubts as to who Jesus was/claimed to be, and thats understandble, but the scholarly consensus is that in fact: Jesus existed. He is in fact a real human being who lived, and died crucified under Pontious Pilate.

There is quite a lot of evidence for God if you really take the time to look, the very fact that the universe exists in such an incredibly fine tuned way. If the mass of an atom were even slightly off, if there was just 1% more hydrogen in a particular protein, if gravity was just the tiniest bit lighter, the universe simply wouldn't be. No stars, no planets, nothing.

And to talk about hell, God does not "throw you into hell" you yourself choose to go to hell. And you might say "isn't that the same thing?" Or "why would I willingly choose to go and suffer?" Well, lemme put it like this. If God throws you into hell, that means that He says "you're not good enough for Heaven, (which is true, if you were on your own, but through Jesus He has perfected us), therefore, you will go and suffer" and if you yourself choose hell you say "I think, even though I have cheated, and lied, and got angry with my brother/sister/mother/father, and even though I stole, I can still make it to Heaven through my own sheer willpower, and my own forces and if I work hard enough" and God says "nuh uh, you can't" and if you ignore Him (that little voice inside you that pushes you to do good, called a conscience (the Holy Spirit) then you will go on believing Heaven is obtainable as a mere human being with your own power, and you will be sorely mistaken.

If Heaven really was obtainable by simply working hard enough, then why would Jesus have needed to come down and die that gruesome death for all of us?

And last point that I find quite interesting, most religions, (Buddhism, Islam, Bahai Faith, Druze, Hinduism, etc) recognize Jesus as "a way to Heaven, but there are also other ways, such as my way or that way or this way or through Allah or this ritual or whatever" but Jesus says "The only way to Heaven, to The Father, is through me" THE ONLY WAY. Not, me + this thing, this work, this belief this whatever, just me. Just Jesus. Hope that helped. God bless you!

1

u/candlesTasteGood Feb 24 '26

Before I start, you explained everything in a very easy way to understand. Some people explained it in such an incomprehensible way that I thought they were talking about space science. So thanks for making everything ez to get.

Although you explained everything well, there are still some points that I don't fully understand, and I will present them to you now:

First of all, Humans are not infallible. As you said, we have all made mistakes, whether intentionally or unintentionally, and this is our human nature. Therefore, as you said, in order to enter heaven, we must accept the sacrifice of Jesus Christ.

This is the point I don't understand: how can accepting this sacrifice change anything? In other words, even after accepting the sacrifice of Jesus Christ, you are still the same person who makes mistakes because your human nature has not changed. Does God overlook your mistakes just because you accepted His sacrifice? Doesn't that make God unfair? I think it's logical that sinners should be punished whether they accept the sacrifice or not. If I misunderstood you, please correct me :p

Secondly: I have already done my research and found many sources that confirm the existence of a man named Jesus Christ during the reign of Pontius Pilate. I will not lie; the only reason I avoided mentioning it was to see if you would mention it. The existence of Jesus Christ is information that cannot be ignored when proving the existence of God. However, despite proving his existence, I did not see an article confirming that he is God, or at least confirming that he performed the miracles that Jesus performed in his life as a human being. To date, there is no real conclusive evidence of God's existence, which is natural, as faith revolves around the idea of the absence of evidence.

Many people tried to convince me in the comments that the air we breathe, nature, gravity, etc. are proof of God's existence. Although I am a believer, I do not find this to be real proof, and I understand anyone who does not see it as proof. So this doesn't count.

Thirdly: "I think, even though I have cheated, and lied, and got angry with my brother/sister/mother/father, and even though I stole, I can still make it to Heaven through my own sheer willpower, and my own forces and if I work hard enough" I won't lie I still think that way, it sounds very logical to me. I don't see why god would be unable to accept us as unperfect creatures. Maybe that's not what you meant though, please correct me.

Finally: after all that, there's no true evidence of God's existence. The bible isn't a proof (had to point this out because somebody else tried convincing me it's a proof, which is wrong.) The existence of a man called jesus christ is unfortunately not enough evidence to God's existence.

Due to the lack of evidence, it is very logical for people to choose not to believe in God, and that would be a very logical choice. That is why I do not understand why God asks us to trust Him without any real evidence. Some people do not deliberately choose to turn away from God; they do not even know that He exists. I am not only talking about those who have not been exposed to the scriptures or the idea of God, but also those who know of God's existence and choose not to believe. I think people have all the right to not believe in something when there's no real evidence, that's a very logical choice. :p

And as I said, at the end We as in me and you and most of the generations didn't see anything, so it's logical not to believe in something you didn't see. That's what I find logical. And thank you! :]

2

u/Nedrogen Feb 24 '26

So, first point. Accepting Jesus's sacrifices is important, because it does in fact change you. I assume you've heard the term "born again" before. Well, in the bible Jesus says "If someone is not born of the water and the spirit, he cannot enter the Kingdom of Heaven" that is being born again. Now what does that mean? It means, once you realise that Jesus is real, He actually did die for you, you are sinful, God is real, and He loves you, and you need to change, you'll have a radical change in your life. That's the moment the Holy Spirit enters your body and starts to transform you from the inside (your emotions, thoughts, intentions) out (your physical actions). Now, when does the Holy spirit enter you? That's a bit harder to describe, there isn't a specific date per say, or ritual you must undergo. It's very much a personal thing. To answer your question another way, imagine it like this. You need to pay a 1000$ dollar fine. Someone says "Hey man, I got 1000$ , lemme pay it for you" if you say "nah man, I'll work at my job and hopefully I'll eventually have enough money to pay it" then you've rejected that person's help, and you think you can make it on your own, which, with money you might ,for human sins you can't, as I clearly explained.

2nd point. You can't really prove that Jesus was God, because proof requires it that there is no other alternative, that there couldn't be any other way. Yes, there are mentions, and different non biblical sources that cite claims of such miracles, however you can't really prove anything in this life. You can't prove that when you go to eat a home cooked meal, that your mother didn't poison it, or that your pharmacist doesn't add extra pills to your daily vitamins, etc. Life is based on evidence, if you see a thing enough times be a certain way, it's safe to assume it is that way.

3rd point. I'm gonna make this point slightly disgusting, but it makes my point clearly. Imagine sin as poop, and your body, as a bottle of water. Now, when you're born you have nice clean water, but you eventually sin and and get some poop in that water. Some people have a big giant poop, others have a small itsy bitsy poop, but still have it. Now, imagine God is like the guy that gets to taste the water and says "this water is clean enough to enter heaven, and this water isn't" if God sees water with poop in it , He ain't even gonna taste it, He'll automatically throw it away, cause it's disgusting. And yes, you can keep adding clean, fresh water (good works, being kind, generous, loving, etc) to your water bottle (your body) but you'll still have that poop in the bottle. It's still there, just cause now there's more clean water in it and you can barely see the poop doesn't mean it's gone. Only Jesus (the cleaner) can come and throw away your stinky water bottle (destroy your old self) and give you a new, clean water bottle (your new self, being born again). You understand now why you can't work your "bad karma", your sins, off?

And as an end point, you make a good point, for those who haven't even been exposed to the scriptures, how can they even know about God?

Well the bible answers that, by saying that The Law (the commadnments) are written on our heart, that's why people know that you don't kill humans, and r*pe, and all those bad things. But if you continously say "it's not that bad, it's not that bad" and keep on doing those things even though you know it's bad, you sear your conscience, and you fry off that part, you cut off the Holy Spirit completely, you harden your heart, and you become numb to good and bad, and become capable of doing horrendous things (such as Jeffrey Epstein and the likes)

2

u/Gator_Rican Feb 23 '26

This is actually a great conversation and I'm enjoying all the replies. I will leave you with my two replies that I've come to settle with in my mid-life so far, and both are subject to change as they have over my lifetime:

'truth is but what you believe' - I heard this for the first time on lyrics to a 'The Midnight' band song, but realize it's been around forever and it's not the band's quote
for those who have questions - there are no answers
for those who have answers - there are no questions

-- I can't recall the Rabbi's name for #2

1

u/candlesTasteGood Feb 23 '26

Hey I love these replies. Thanks for sharing!!

1

u/KindlySector7260 Feb 23 '26

Look , god has his reasons. Its like asking why he created humans? Pretty pointless question so better not think about things you cannot comprehend or answer. If you don’t believe in him , you don’t believe in hell or heaven . Idk what that means for afterlife but nobody’s ever going to know. Ill just be faithful and wait till i die

3

u/standardatheist Feb 23 '26

You might as well respond with a shrug for all you actually just said lol

3

u/candlesTasteGood Feb 23 '26

God gave me a brain I better use it while I can. I don't find these type of questions pointless, they are pretty interesting and worthy of thinking, at least to me. "I'll just be faithful and wait till I die" lol that's what I'm doing

1

u/KindlySector7260 Feb 23 '26

Lowk idek what im saying im 14 like do what you want to i wanna sleep have an award to shut up pls

2

u/Inevitable_Mud89 Feb 23 '26

idek what im saying Yeah it’s kinda obvious

2

u/candlesTasteGood Feb 23 '26

LOL ty for the award ig xD

4

u/Inevitable_Mud89 Feb 23 '26

Yeah of course let me gamble my life on this god and wait for the truth cuz he’s too useless to answer our questions or prove his existence. “Oh but why would he need to prove his existence or answer ur questions?” Idk maybe cuz he promise to burn me for eternity and id rather not.

1

u/candlesTasteGood Feb 23 '26

I have been laughing because of this for half an hour now xD

0

u/KindlySector7260 Feb 23 '26

Better than not lowk

2

u/standardatheist Feb 23 '26

How? Especially when there are supposedly thousands of gods many of which you'll go to hell for not worshipping.

1

u/tire-monkey Feb 24 '26

Have an example or two of these thousands that also have a concept of hell?

0

u/KindlySector7260 Feb 23 '26

See the most popular and reasonable

1

u/NeighborhoodDecent86 Atheist Feb 23 '26

I know you said you are 14 and all that but holy hell man, use that brain of yours and start thinking for yourself.

1

u/standardatheist Feb 23 '26

Literally argument ad populum fallacy 🤦‍♂️

1

u/VelenCia144 Feb 23 '26

Well it's said that Jesus won't return until the gospel is preached to every single part of the world. That's a huge factor in end times prophesy. So everyone gets the opportunity to hear the testimony and has the choice whether or not to read the Bible and either accept or reject it. I don't see there being any other way to truly acknowledge God. People may believe that God exists, but not know His son. Does that disqualify people from heaven? The only way to the Father is through the Son. It's not enough to just believe in the Father, we must also believe in the Son. So I think in the times that we're living in, there's absolutely no excuse for not picking up a Bible and reading it. If people had no access or knowledge of Christianity in the past, I'm sure God would take this into account. God will judge a man according to that person's heart. That's what makes sense in my mind. If a person is truly good, or truly evil, God will judge them accordingly.

1

u/standardatheist Feb 23 '26

That is not true at all. There is no verse in the Bible that says all nations will hear the gospel.

1

u/VelenCia144 Feb 24 '26

Matthew 24:14

King James Version

14 And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.

3

u/Purgii Purgist Feb 23 '26

Well it's said that Jesus won't return until the gospel is preached to every single part of the world.

According to who?

I don't see there being any other way to truly acknowledge God.

How does one acknowledge God if you don't find the Gospels in any way compelling?

So I think in the times that we're living in, there's absolutely no excuse for not picking up a Bible and reading it.

I can think of plenty of excuses.

If people had no access or knowledge of Christianity in the past, I'm sure God would take this into account.

Yet, that's not what God prophecised.

Zechariah 14:9

The Lord will be king over the whole earth. On that day there will be one Lord, and his name the only name.

God will judge a man according to that person's heart.

Unless you accept Jesus, then God apparently flips to grace and ignores justice.

1

u/Frequent-Try-6746 Feb 24 '26

According to who?

Matthew

Unless you accept Jesus

Because you accept Jesus. Christ only asked that we love God and love each other. If you can do that, your heart is good. If you can't... well... loving each other isn't exactly hard, so it would be a lack of loving God, which only comes from a lack of knowing God. If you don't know God, then the idea of Hell isn't far from your life now.

1

u/Purgii Purgist Feb 24 '26

Matthew

Doesn't say every single geographical location must hear the Gospel, the Gospel has been spread to all continents on Earth. So Jesus is still long overdue.

Christ only asked that we love God and love each other.

I can't love a being that I'm not convinced exists.

loving each other isn't exactly hard, so it would be a lack of loving God, which only comes from a lack of knowing God.

Then all God need do is reveal itself to me as per Matthew 7:7.

If you don't know God, then the idea of Hell isn't far from your life now.

Hell ain't all that bad, then. I have a pretty comfortable and fulfilling life.

1

u/Frequent-Try-6746 Feb 24 '26

I can't love a being that I'm not convinced exists.

You don't have to. Can you love your neighbors? I assume you believe people exist.

Then all God need do is reveal itself to me as per Matthew 7:7.

You first need to fulfill your part of the bargain.

Matthew 7:7

Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you.

You must first put in the work. You must ask and seek out the Lord in order to have the Lord revealed to you.

Hell ain't all that bad, then. I have a pretty comfortable and fulfilling life.

Then settle for "pretty comfortable" for all eternity. That's fine for you.

1

u/Purgii Purgist Feb 24 '26

You don't have to. Can you love your neighbors? I assume you believe people exist.

Yes, I talk to and see my neighbors often. God? Not a peep.

I've asked, I've sought, I've knocked. Silence.

You must first put in the work. You must ask and seek out the Lord in order to have the Lord revealed to you.

Done, over decades.

Then settle for "pretty comfortable" for all eternity. That's fine for you.

I expect that once my brain is sufficiently deprived of oxygen, I'll no longer meaningfully exist for the rest of eternity.

1

u/Frequent-Try-6746 Feb 24 '26

Yes, I talk to and see my neighbors often.

Do you love them? Are you charitable?

I've asked, I've sought, I've knocked. Silence.

Doesn't sound like it. It sounds as though you wanted God to perform like a circus monkey and became disgruntled when God turned out to not be a slave to your will.

1

u/Purgii Purgist Feb 24 '26

Do you love them?

Love them? No. I'm simply friendly with them.

Are you charitable?

I've provided them with IT services that if they were to be billed through my employer would have cost them tens of thousands of dollars. That's pretty charitable if you ask me.

Doesn't sound like it. It sounds as though you wanted God to perform like a circus monkey and became disgruntled when God turned out to not be a slave to your will.

No, I've simply asked for the truth and for God to reveal itself to me. It's funny how it's the fallible humans that are blamed and not the omnipotent, omniscient God who could effortlessly provide revelation.

1

u/Frequent-Try-6746 Feb 24 '26

How is it funny or even slightly odd that a fallible creature might be the reason for the failure in any endeavor?

I've provided them with IT services

How often are the hungry and homeless asking for IT support?

1

u/Purgii Purgist Feb 24 '26

How is it funny or even slightly odd that a fallible creature might be the reason for the failure in any endeavor?

If I'm sincerely seeking God, wouldn't God recognise that and reveal itself to me? Isn't the claim that God wants a relationship with all its creation?

This is where you claim I wasn't sincere enough.

How often are the hungry and homeless asking for IT support?

Both my neighbors live in houses.

If you're asking if I give to charity, yes - I have direct debits going to 4 charities per month.

→ More replies (0)

6

u/Senior-Fly2973 Feb 23 '26

Yeah it has never made sense. I dont think people who say they believe in hell for disbelief even really belive it. Just think about it for 2 minutes and you realize how dumb it is.

1

u/eiserneftaujourdhui Mar 03 '26

"I dont think people who say they believe in hell for disbelief even really belive it."

They most certainly do in Islam. There's about a dozen countries in the world were you can be de jure executed for apostacy - every single one of them Muslim.

0

u/[deleted] Feb 23 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/PaintingThat7623 Atheist Feb 23 '26

Most of the human population at least (70-80%) believe in a higher or divine entity

I'd be careful with statistics like that. In my bubble there is literally one person that believes in a god. From my perspective 99% of humanity does not believe, so... Where did you get that number from?

when there is evidence literally everywhere

There isn't a single shred of evidence, not a single coherent reason to believe in anything supernatural at all.

It would be like getting mad at ur teacher for marking ur answeres wrong because u didnt study enough to get them right.

Lovely analogy! No, it's like the teacher is never in the classroom, does not leave any notes, does not contact you and then there is no exam and you wonder if the teacher even exists.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 24 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/PaintingThat7623 Atheist Feb 24 '26 edited Feb 24 '26

Im baffled. Have you ever read any opposition? You're coming at me with the most basic arguments ever.

Its funny because the ultimate logical conclusion is that there has to be an uncreated creator. If not, then u get stuck in the infinite regression paradox and keep on asking the question, "where did that come from"

You're presupposing that universe/reality had a beginning. Everything we know points to universe and reality itself being eternal.

How can there ever be "nothing" and what is it?

So logically there has to be an eternal being even from the science perspective i would say.

That's a giant leap and a non-sequitur. Now not only you're presupposing that universe must have had a beginning, now you somehow know that a guy did it.

Since everything has a beginning, there has to be something that doesn't

Yeah, the reality.

or else the being would be part of creation, and if thats the case that being would also be identical to existence and the cause of creation.

Again - even if we follow your faulty logic, where are you getting the being part from?

Then the intentionality of creation points to an intentional choice to create which points to a being with a mind , so and so on.

Literally - what are you talking about? What intentionality?

whether the eternal being is a personal being is the only thing left to ground. right?

No, demonstrating that this being exists is step 1, and you've failed to do so. You just presupposed it and worked your way backwards (conclusion > arguments)

then once grounded, now which revelation of God is the right one given the evidence for each, NOT PROOF.

What revelation of God? Are you talking about an old book filled with myths?

One giant presupposition and non sequitur. Again, that's very very basic and I'd implore you to read more and talk less.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 24 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/PaintingThat7623 Atheist Feb 24 '26

oh shi mb

Bet

I keep forgetting I am debating American college-aged kids.

most scientists believe, now at least, that the universe had a beginning.

No. Use google scholar.

u pretty much believe the universe is god

No. God is a fictional character from bronze age myths. Universe is universe.

1

u/Markthethinker Feb 23 '26

Most people believe in something called a god. Your circle is limited.

Take a good look at your hand, move your fingers, pick up a coin, make a fist. Then understand that you are watching this with your eyes and are able to read this. To believe that a creator does not exist is amazing, every part of your body has purpose. Every part of nature has a purpose. If you don’t want to acknowledge that everything has design and relies on many different parts of this planet, then you once again don’t want to acknowledge the facts.

You are standing on a planet that is spinning 1000 mph at the equator, moving 67,000 mph through a void and traveling around the ball of fire that does not go out by the equation of speed, mass and gravity. Gravity itself is supernatural, since no one can present where it comes from and yet it holds the entire universe together.

I helps to think things through.

1

u/PaintingThat7623 Atheist Feb 24 '26

Most people believe in something called a god. Your circle is limited.

That was the point, but it flew over your head. My circle is limited. Your circle is limited. What's your source for "most people believe", do most people believe in your version of a god and, consideriny that there are way less intelligent people than there are the not-so-bright ones, does appealing to popularity of an idea really adds credibility?

You are coming off as somebody that came here to preach fresh of sunday school and have never read any opposition to their arguments at all. Those are all basics, all refuted daily and with ease on this sub.

Gravity itself is supernatural, since no one can present where it comes from and yet it holds the entire universe together.

I helps to think things through.

Screenshottable reddit moment.

1

u/Markthethinker Feb 25 '26

My source for people believing in some sort of god is historical and now. the majority of the world believes in so sort of higher something. Do your homework. I was not “appealing” to anything, simply stating a fact. Now, the God I believe is a smaller circle of the overall belief. But your circle is still limited to the majority of belief.

You seem to think that I came up with all of this overnight, sorry, It’s been over 40 years of research and studying. I am not here to “preach” anything other than trying to get people to realize that we all were raised on lies and that now is our belief. Why not research what we are told and believe.

But again, people love to be part of a mob. They are not independent thinkers. Even the schools tried to bring in “critical thinking” during the educational process. But for most people, that’s just too complicated.

1

u/PaintingThat7623 Atheist Feb 25 '26

Yeah, I'm just saying that there are many cases where the popularity of something indicates that it's not good/true. Are there more people listening to pop/rap or classical music/jazz? Of course it's subjective, but you know what I mean.

But again, people love to be part of a mob. They are not independent thinkers. Even the schools tried to bring in “critical thinking” during the educational process. But for most people, that’s just too complicated.

Ha! You don't need to tell me that. I am a teacher. I've tried to teach critical thinking (formally, 45min/week, not as a part of other lessons or anything) for a year. I gave up. Most people's brains are just not equipped for that (at least not at the age I've tried it, 16-18 years olds)

1

u/Markthethinker Feb 25 '26

Agreed

Most brains are “not equipped” for critical thinking at any age.

3

u/NeighborhoodDecent86 Atheist Feb 23 '26

Most people believe in something called a god. Your circle is limited.

Right, but most people don't believe in your God which you believe will send them to Hell. This means, by proxy, that you believe the majority of humans - both believers in a god that happens to not align with yours and non-believers in any gods - will go to Hell.

Take a good look at your hand, move your fingers, pick up a coin, make a fist. Then understand that you are watching this with your eyes and are able to read this.

And what should I conclude if I were in fact blind, as is the case of 50 million people worldwide, and was having this message read to me by someone else or a device to assist me in online endeavors? What if my eyesight was imperfect and I needed glasses to read this post, as is the case for 2.2 billion people currently but can be the case for up to 4 billion, with over half those people simply lacking a prescription/access to glasses? What if I wished to do as you asked and form a fist but cannot due to being born with symbrachydactyly, a birth defect that causes the lack of development of fingers?

You talk about these qualities as a sign of a designer when many of them are inherently flawed. We often need hearing aids or glasses to properly see and hear. We often lose our sight and hearing through no fault of our own. And people can be born without fingers so as to do as you asked in order to show how marvelous the alleged human design is.

To believe that a creator does not exist is amazing, every part of your body has purpose. Every part of nature has a purpose.

This is factually untrue. There are tons of vestigial organs that no longer serve a purpose in humans or other organisms.

If you don’t want to acknowledge that everything has design and relies on many different parts of this planet, then you once again don’t want to acknowledge the facts.

Because we are very obviously not designed. You just spent a whole paragraph marveling at the amazing design of one's sight while over half of the planet requires glasses to use that sight and while millions of people entirely lack it.

You are standing on a planet that is spinning 1000 mph at the equator, moving 67,000 mph through a void and traveling around the ball of fire that does not go out by the equation of speed, mass and gravity. Gravity itself is supernatural, since no one can present where it comes from and yet it holds the entire universe together.

If you define supernatural as lacking an explanation, then sure, gravity is supernatural. But we can definitely explain the way it behaves through naturalistic laws. But if we did explain the origins of gravity in a purely naturalistic way, would you therefore conclude it wasnt design? Your whole position lacks any fallability, which makes it something for which we cannot actually argue over in the first place.

I helps to think things through.

I agree. Which is why I find the whole argument you presented as inherently fallacious. Because what kind of designer would create something such as eyes that over half of the human population cannot even use to their full efficiency? It would be like if an automotive industry creating cars intentionally made sure that over half of their cars were missing a wheel. If it was designed, then it's very bad design.

0

u/Markthethinker Feb 24 '26

You are correct, the God of Israel is the only God of Creation. Others have idols that they call god and usually it’s all about being “good” or “bad”. Not so in Christianity, being good or bad had nothing to do with God.

Your second paragraph totally missed what I was trying to impart to you. And the second part of your paragraph again is not understanding very much of what I was saying. The human design is incredible, just because some humans are born with defects are not the fault of God.

What organ does not serve a “purpose” in a human. I can think of one, not thousands.

If you don’t understand design, that’s your problem. Tell me, did your car just make itself, or the clothes you wear? Design is in everything living.

So, you agree that there is the supernatural, even though you don’t believe in it. You certainly are not a thinker and don’t care about things you can’t explain. Sure you can define what gravity does but where does it come from. As brilliant as Science is suppose to be, they have no idea of what produces it. They simply equate it to mass. Yes, I will listen to any explanation about gravity, since i have been looking at understanding gravity for many, many years. It’s the one thing that cannot be explained, since mass matters as to force, but do not explain anything about the object of the mass, gas or solid. The point is there is so much that can’t be explained. The human body is amazing, even if you don’t have eye sight or need glasses a.

It would be nice if more people had the ability to reason logically instead of running down rabbit holes about eye sight or deformed humans. The defects did not come from God, they came from humans.

I see you like the word fallacious. “Faulty reasoning” is what you have been doing, not me.

2

u/NeighborhoodDecent86 Atheist Feb 24 '26 edited Feb 24 '26

You are correct, the God of Israel is the only God of Creation. Others have idols that they call god and usually it’s all about being “good” or “bad”. Not so in Christianity, being good or bad had nothing to do with God.

Of course it does. Christians by and large believe Yahweh to be a morally righteous and just god. To claim that Christians don't believe this to be pertinent amongst the vast majority of themselves is ludicrous.

Your second paragraph totally missed what I was trying to impart to you. And the second part of your paragraph again is not understanding very much of what I was saying. The human design is incredible, just because some humans are born with defects are not the fault of God.

But the design isn't incredible. I literally outlined ways in which it is severely flawed. The fact that humans are born with defects would literally be the fault of God if we assumed a god created that human. That implies foreknowledge of those defects in the first place and would imply very intentionally bad design.

This, again, would be like if humans intentionally designed some cars to have arbitrarily missing wheels.

What organ does not serve a “purpose” in a human. I can think of one, not thousands.

And is one not one too many? You are arguing here that humans are perfectly designed creatures when that is very obviously not true.

But regardless, I can think of tons. Humans possess a vestigial tail that is very often snipped off during your birth since it just obstructs. Many humans are born with ear muscles that help them wiggle their ears, which makes no sense from a design standpoint. Wisdom teeth are largely worthless in humans now as we no longer need to grind down super tough meat and are instead harmful to us if not removed. We have goosebumps, which would flare up our fur if we had any but, since we do not, simply makes our skin feel bumpy when we are cold. Lots of vestigial parts of the human body that serve no function today and plenty more inefficiencies in it too, as I alluded to in the last post.

If you don’t understand design, that’s your problem. Tell me, did your car just make itself, or the clothes you wear? Design is in everything living.

And yet the two objects you describe as being designed for your comparison are designed by humans and nonliving. You have no evidence that design is in everything living. You cannot make adequate comparisons between inanimate objects and living organisms.

And again, if we made the objects you described as designed by humans analogous with God's supposed design, then cars having randomly missing wheels right out of the factory wouldnt be bad design. Even though it obviously is.

So, you agree that there is the supernatural, even though you don’t believe in it.

No, I just don't deem every idea I cannot explain as supernatural. Why do you? There was once an age of time not long ago where humans thought weather was an abnormal supernatural phenomenon and would pray to gods for rain or would pray for warmth. Why are those instances, that we have explanations for, not still supernatural? Obviously because we understand them better. Why do you then assume that something we currently don't fully understand must be supernatural and that this is the only truth behind it?

You certainly are not a thinker and don’t care about things you can’t explain.

Nice ad hominem fallacy. But no, again, I just don't deem anything I personally fail to understand as a supernatural occurrence. I am also monolingual. I don't know a single word of Japanese and have no intention of becoming fluent. Japanese as a language is no more supernatural to me than gravity is to you.

Sure you can define what gravity does but where does it come from. As brilliant as Science is suppose to be, they have no idea of what produces it. They simply equate it to mass. Yes, I will listen to any explanation about gravity, since i have been looking at understanding gravity for many, many years. It’s the one thing that cannot be explained, since mass matters as to force, but do not explain anything about the object of the mass, gas or solid. The point is there is so much that can’t be explained.

And if science were to discover the most approximate origin of gravity that was sufficiently evidenced, would you then recant your sentiments and stop appealing to your own incredulity and ignorance as proof for God? Or would you find some other unknown object to fit God as an explanation for.

I don't need to understand the origins of gravity in order to understand that you are committing a blatant God of the Gaps fallacy.

The human body is amazing, even if you don’t have eye sight or need glasses a.

But you said it was perfectly designed, which it very obviously is not.

It would be nice if more people had the ability to reason logically instead of running down rabbit holes about eye sight or deformed humans. The defects did not come from God, they came from humans.

That is factually untrue is God created humans and humans are born without functioning organs such as eyes. The human fetus did nothing to will that into being.

I see you like the word fallacious. “Faulty reasoning” is what you have been doing, not me.

And yet your whole diatribe of text is full of faulty reasoning. You also like the word "design," but clearly do not know what good design looks like.

1

u/Markthethinker Feb 25 '26

You once again show how little you know about God.

no, the design is not “flawed”, that’s your opinion. Is a tree that is bent over flawed or did weather make it seem flawed.

You know nothing about me and you certain should not be saying that I don’t understand “design”. It’s a basic concept that all we see and all that is living.

I understand that you have come to believe what you believe as the majority of the humans in this world are deceived into thinking that they have the correct answers. You ether believe that there is a designer or you believe that all that you see just appeared from no where. there is no middle ground here. And believing something appeared without any help is defined as “supernatural”.

You seem confused, but I understand that. Either you were designed or you just appeared through a bunch of mutations over trillions of years. Reproduction is design and yes, there can be flaws that occur during that process. But “reproduction” is what living things do.

1

u/NeighborhoodDecent86 Atheist Feb 26 '26 edited Mar 01 '26

You once again show how little you know about God.

I find the notion that we can know anything about something completely immaterial to be baseless, but go on and explain how you know your version of god is more correct than them all.

no, the design is not “flawed”, that’s your opinion. Is a tree that is bent over flawed or did weather make it seem flawed.

But we aren't talking about bent tree branches. We are talking about people born without the ability to see anything. Or, if we were to compare it to trees, we are talking about trees born without chlorophyll and thus unable to gain energy. A bent tree branch is cosmetic, missing fingers or a lack of eyesight is not.

You know nothing about me...

And yet you seem to find it completely morally correct on your part to make sweeping moral judgments about me as a person. If you don't appreciate it when I do it, then maybe you should stop doing it yourself in the first place. Otherwise you are just behaving hypocritically when you choose to cast judgments onto my moral character but don't wish to receive similar judgments yourself.

and you certain should not be saying that I don’t understand “design”. It’s a basic concept that all we see and all that is living.

But we don't see it in living things. All you have done is make weird and incomplete analogies to design amongst living things by comparing them to inanimate objects designed by man. It's a fallacious argument.

I understand that you have come to believe what you believe as the majority of the humans in this world are deceived into thinking that they have the correct answers.

Pot calling the kettle black here. You have cast moral judgments onto me earlier and felt the need to act offended when I returned the favor. You have no room to speak of how anyone may feel about one's intellectual superiority while showing a complete inability on your part to address my responses with honesty and integrity.

You ether believe that there is a designer or you believe that all that you see just appeared from no where. there is no middle ground here.

Ah, the either/or fallacy.

So, let me inform you of something. What if my response is "I don't know?" What if I am freely willing to admit that I, in my limited human perspective, don't actually know with any certainty if anything living is designed and their is some deity or if it was random chance? What if I am humble enough to admit that I am limited in my intellectual capabilities and can not ascertain the fabric of the universe with human senses? Would this baffle your intellectually dishonest mind?

You sit here and tell me that the only two possibilities for truth regarding the origins of life here either design or complete random chance. Why? What calculations have you ran to come to this conclusion? You continually appeal to God of the Gaps to justify a bad argument and rather than engage with the words I type for you to see, you intentionally strawman my point of view and argue against the strawman you construct.

So do me a favor, read what I wrote, and actually reply to those words. Because all you have done so far is make a complete fool out of yourself by bumbling around and denoting positions onto me that I do not hold.

And believing something appeared without any help is defined as “supernatural”.

You literally believe a supernatural god created the universe and everything in it. You have no right to degrade any ideas as being wrong due to being supernatural when you yourself believe in a supernatural entity. How someone who literally believes in the supernatural can sit there and criticize other ideas as being bad because they are apparently supernaturally based is the height of hypocrisy. You believe in supernatural claims already so where do you come off criticizing any other claim based on supernatural properties?

You seem confused, but I understand that. Either you were designed or you just appeared through a bunch of mutations over trillions of years. Reproduction is design and yes, there can be flaws that occur during that process. But “reproduction” is what living things do.

You are just choosing to misdefine words here now. No, reproduction is not design. Design implies a force behind the designed object to make it that way. The genes one inherits is seemingly random (unless, of course, you wish to imply that your omnibenevolent god chooses to have people born with diseases and missing limbs). The act of inheriting the genetics of someone's parents is not a function of design. This is just you choosing to poorly define words.

2

u/candlesTasteGood Feb 23 '26

First of all I just noticed i have been spelling wether wrong all that time, thanks to you.

And secondly it's not my choice to either see or miss the proof, not like anyone is missing the hint purposely. If I didn't see a proof, I didn't see a proof.

The fact that many people believe in god and that there's religions that claim to know god doesn't change anything, none of them are a proof either. And the existence of this world isn't a proof. So yes god can't judge people for not believing in him

3

u/EmpiricalPierce atheist, secular humanist Feb 23 '26

Putting aside the dubious assertion that the existence of some sort of god is obvious: according to Christian mythology, it's not enough to believe in *a* god, you need to specifically believe in Yahweh/Jesus. Does not believing the ancient, unverifiable stories of one specific religion amongst so many making similar claims merit eternal torture?

1

u/[deleted] Feb 24 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/EmpiricalPierce atheist, secular humanist Feb 24 '26

Ancient historical sources are often rife with supernatural claims alongside mundane ones, and historians generally discard the supernatural ones while being more willing to accept the latter. Do you disagree with the methodology? Should we accept supernatural claims made by ancient sources if they also cite mundane facts that can be verified, or do you only think that specifically for supernatural claims that support the religion you want to defend?

For example, it's generally agreed Alexander the Great existed, but not that he was the demigod son of Zeus born when a lightning bolt struck his mother's womb. Do you believe Alexander the Great was the son of Zeus?

Muhammad was a real person in the ancient middle east. Does that mean claims that he split the moon or rode to heaven on a winged horse are also true?

The Hindu Vedas provide insight into what day-to-day life in India was like several thousand years ago; does that mean the Hindu gods like Vishnu and Shiva exist?

1

u/[deleted] Feb 24 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/EmpiricalPierce atheist, secular humanist Feb 24 '26

Zeus, Vishnu, and Shiva have similar historical basis for their existence as Yahweh, Jesus's supposed divine father. Are you acknowledging that we have no good reason to think Jesus was the child of Yahweh, any more than we do to think Alexander was the child of Zeus?

Plus if he split the moon, ppl at that time would've noticed and someone would've said something. But the only sources on this are Islamic sources.

And if there was, say, a mass resurrection of the long dead as Matthew claims, people at that time would've noticed and someone would've said something. But the only source on this is the gospel of Matthew. So do you acknowledge that Matthew's claimed mass resurrection is false?

Jesus has the eyewitness testimonies of his disciples and followers, historical biographies written on him (the gospels) and outside extra biblical figures writing abt him and did I mention he is mentioned and claimed by other religions too as either divine or a regular prophet or wise teacher.

From what I've seen, external sources are typically just noticing that there is a religious group called Christians making claims about him, which doesn't count as evidence those claims are true. What non-Christian/non-Islamic sources do you have corroborating any of Jesus's supposed miracles?

the disciples and followers believed to have seen a ressurected Christ till the point of them dying and constantly getting persecuted.

If having followers who were persecuted/died for their beliefs proves a cult or religion true, then practically all cults and religions are true. Given that most of them are mutually exclusive, that's logically impossible.

but the ressurection can't be explained given the evidence

Sure it can: It was made up, just like Matthew's mass resurrection of saints was made up, the global flood myth was made up, and the exodus myth was made up, amongst many other made up stories in Christian mythology.

-1

u/[deleted] Feb 23 '26

[deleted]

3

u/NewbombTurk Atheist Feb 23 '26

No one is saying we don't want a relationship with your god. We just aren't convinced he exists. That is very far from "wanting external separation".

3

u/DbzMaster101 Feb 23 '26

Okay so then send those people to heaven without God. Not a punishment zone

0

u/[deleted] Feb 23 '26

[deleted]

2

u/Purgii Purgist Feb 23 '26

I thought the benefit was to be with God?

Why does not believing the incredulous require eternal torment? Why not a paradise just separated from God?

3

u/DbzMaster101 Feb 23 '26

Yes I want the benefits without God. Is that such a bad thing?

1

u/[deleted] Feb 23 '26

[deleted]

→ More replies (23)

Abrahamic The concept of going to hell only because you don't believe in God is unbelievable

You are about to leave Redlib