How could a loving god send people to Hell?

[HoreTore]

The need to punish sins would be something I would regard as evil though, so the god TR speaks about is imperfect and evil IMO.

[jirisys]

C.S. Lewis is a hack, stop quoting him. He made two horrible movies about people coming out of the closet. There wasn't even any homosexuality involved at all!

Unless you're into incest.

~Jirisys ()

[spankythehippo]

Confirmation is impossible right now, every person who has claimed to have read the Bible has been accused of not reading it correctly.

That's exactly my point. If confirmation is impossible, I don't believe it.

[Sigurd]

The need to punish sins would be something I would regard as evil though...

Hippie!!

[Kralizec]

I agree with first part, not until I would say the last 150 were there very many atheist at all. I see good reason for this as well [future thread].

There have always been irreligious people. The “ good reason” why that was not apparent was that most societies persecuted them when they made themselves known.

Second part I disagree fully as does the bible. In fact op points that out from biblical theology.

There is nothing to disagree about. The meaning of the words is obvious. “Rejecting God” is a phrase that places the blame of the seperation between God and an individual on the latter. And in your opening post of this thread, you justify the existance of hell (and all its suffering) with the warped that atheists want it.

are you not the one that posted this before? I offered debate to show this is not true at all and I can prove it. It is your worldview governed by your hearts wants that controls what you believe and how you inteprit evidence.

No, I’ve responded to your posts before but not on this particular subject.

I’ve been raised irreligiously but when I was 18-19 I did chose to read the bible voluntarily. I was open to the idea of believing, but it failed to convince me.

Here’s a to-the-point question for you: going by the bible, we know that God (the Father) appeared before the Israelites several times. Later on, Jesus performed various miracles, like curing a bunch of lepers leading to one to drop on his knees and praise god.
God hasn’t appeared in any recognisable way to humanity for 2,000 years now, and in fact all proof we have that he ever did in the first place is the writings of men. Why is it that of our generation a bigger “leap of faith” is expected than the Israelites? Isn’t that tremendously unfair?

[Idaho]

As we become more technologically skilled and more detailed in our knowledge of history we inevitably reexamine the bible and religion with the same tools we use to build cars, mobile phones and particle accelerators. We see that human religion has set patterns throughout history. Even the stories get recycled.

The recycled stories of the Bible are seen in a context impossible to those even 200 years ago. It's interesting that fundamentalist christians dissaprove of detailed theological study and the few people I know who have undertaken such study started as christians and ended up not being christians.

[total relism]

BTW which bible TR are you referring to and which language and edition?

I use different ones, what passage are you concerned with? I usually use nkjv or niv.

The evidence is in the Bible? Has anyone confirmed this with first-hand experience? Without confirmation, or at least a valid theory, it becomes difficult to accept as truth.

Written by first hand observers, but you will no dout reject them. So I say we should reject Abraham Lincoln, I dont think he was real person as we can only go by what people said about him, there is no proof. Just as I dont think you have a brain or are a real person. You cannot provide me with evidence i can see, so therefore you have no brain and are probably a robot typing. But if it confirming evidence/evidence constant with bible, well that happens to be my specialty and is a topic coming in this series.

Also in regards to topic and biblical theology, the evidence come from bible on what it says god is, as that is the authority on the god of bible.

The need to punish sins would be something I would regard as evil though, so the god TR speaks about is imperfect and evil IMO.

I would say it would be a non-loving god to allow sin to happen. I think what america/england etc did in ww2 was loving, they did not believe in letting sin go unanswered. Think on this quote

I used to think that wrath was unworthy of God. Isn't God love? Shouldn't divine love be beyond wrath? ?God is love,and God loves every person and every creature. That's exactly why God is wrathful against some of them. My last resistance to the idea of God's wrath was a casualty of the war in the former Yugoslavia, a region from which I come. According to some estimates, 200,000 people were killed, and over 3,000,000 were displaced. My villages and cities were destroyed, my people shelled day in and day out, some of them brutalize beyond imagination, and I could not imagine God not being angry. Or think of Rwanda in the last decade of the past century, where 800,000 people were hacked to death in one hundred days! How did God react to the carnage? By doting on the perpetrators in a grandfatherly fashion? By refusing to condemn the bloodbath but instead affirming th perpetrators' basic goodness? Wasn't God fiercely angry with them? Though I used to complain about the indecency of the idea of God's wrath, I cam to thin that I would have to rebel against a God who wasn't wrathful at the sight of the world' evil. God isn't wrathful in spite of being love. God is wrathful because God is love (Miroslav Volf as quoted in Is God a Moral Monster? by Paul Copan, 192).


I think the differences in opinion between you and god is, he is holy sinless and hates sin, you prabley don't, so don't see any problem with sin and judgment as sin is not really wrong to you. Think of if i were to steal from you something you liked alot, or even beat you up and rob you. Than you go to police and they say well we just dont care that much so we will do nothing. Or a murderer kills your child, same thing judge says well we are to moral for not forgiving this sin/wrong so we just wont punish as we are to moral for that and should just forgive.

I think the lack of justice is a moral problem for those such as Muslims in the Koranic god.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=741gF4A_k3A


what your rally saying is sin is ok, or some sin is ok. But than who decides what sin is ok and what is not? also if god is not sinless and haven without sin, than your asking god to dwell with sin and allow sin in haven. I dont think this is what people picture/hope for in a haven, one with sin.

That's exactly my point. If confirmation is impossible, I don't believe it.

I just want to say I disagree fully with this and hope you stay around for future threads.

There have always been irreligious people. The “ good reason” why that was not apparent was that most societies persecuted them when they made themselves known.



There is nothing to disagree about. The meaning of the words is obvious. “Rejecting God” is a phrase that places the blame of the seperation between God and an individual on the latter. And in your opening post of this thread, you justify the existance of hell (and all its suffering) with the warped that atheists want it.



No, I’ve responded to your posts before but not on this particular subject.

I’ve been raised irreligiously but when I was 18-19 I did chose to read the bible voluntarily. I was open to the idea of believing, but it failed to convince me.

Here’s a to-the-point question for you: going by the bible, we know that God (the Father) appeared before the Israelites several times. Later on, Jesus performed various miracles, like curing a bunch of lepers leading to one to drop on his knees and praise god.
God hasn’t appeared in any recognisable way to humanity for 2,000 years now, and in fact all proof we have that he ever did in the first place is the writings of men. Why is it that of our generation a bigger “leap of faith” is expected than the Israelites? Isn’t that tremendously unfair?

Never said there was not, i said there has never been many. Could you provide documentation for claim please.


I disagree, if I chose as the bible says to reject god all my life, why than would I want him later?




ok my bad.
question, I disagree, miracles prophecy etc was done through time until the bible was finished being written as a stamp by god for his authority. There is a reason god does not appear to man today [future topic of the 15]. god know currenentley dwells within believers us called the holy spirit. I myself have thought same thing, god just appear to me so I will know and live my life for you fully without dout etc the rest of my life. Than I learned more from bible on why this does not happen [future thread]. But jesus did say when people asked for miracles/signs he said that if they dont believe the scripture [bible] they wont believe because of any miracles. I have had miracles in my life, than within months I start saying well maybe it was this or that etc because of the worldview.

As we become more technologically skilled and more detailed in our knowledge of history we inevitably reexamine the bible and religion with the same tools we use to build cars, mobile phones and particle accelerators. We see that human religion has set patterns throughout history. Even the stories get recycled.

The recycled stories of the Bible are seen in a context impossible to those even 200 years ago. It's interesting that fundamentalist christians dissaprove of detailed theological study and the few people I know who have undertaken such study started as christians and ended up not being christians.

These are the type of claims i would love to debate you 1v1 on, but we both now you cannot back up any of your claims. As i sated before i will debate you on any of your claims you have made on any of my post, you can chose the topic.

[Idaho]

I can choose the topic? How about :

Favourite contradictions in the Bible.

[HoreTore]

I would say it would be a non-loving god to allow sin to happen. I think what america/england etc did in ww2 was loving, they did not believe in letting sin go unanswered. Think on this quote

I used to think that wrath was unworthy of God. Isn't God love? Shouldn't divine love be beyond wrath? ?God is love,and God loves every person and every creature. That's exactly why God is wrathful against some of them. My last resistance to the idea of God's wrath was a casualty of the war in the former Yugoslavia, a region from which I come. According to some estimates, 200,000 people were killed, and over 3,000,000 were displaced. My villages and cities were destroyed, my people shelled day in and day out, some of them brutalize beyond imagination, and I could not imagine God not being angry. Or think of Rwanda in the last decade of the past century, where 800,000 people were hacked to death in one hundred days! How did God react to the carnage? By doting on the perpetrators in a grandfatherly fashion? By refusing to condemn the bloodbath but instead affirming th perpetrators' basic goodness? Wasn't God fiercely angry with them? Though I used to complain about the indecency of the idea of God's wrath, I cam to thin that I would have to rebel against a God who wasn't wrathful at the sight of the world' evil. God isn't wrathful in spite of being love. God is wrathful because God is love (Miroslav Volf as quoted in Is God a Moral Monster? by Paul Copan, 192).


I think the differences in opinion between you and god is, he is holy sinless and hates sin, you prabley don't, so don't see any problem with sin and judgment as sin is not really wrong to you. Think of if i were to steal from you something you liked alot, or even beat you up and rob you. Than you go to police and they say well we just dont care that much so we will do nothing. Or a murderer kills your child, same thing judge says well we are to moral for not forgiving this sin/wrong so we just wont punish as we are to moral for that and should just forgive.

I think the lack of justice is a moral problem for those such as Muslims in the Koranic god.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=741gF4A_k3A


what your rally saying is sin is ok, or some sin is ok. But than who decides what sin is ok and what is not? also if god is not sinless and haven without sin, than your asking god to dwell with sin and allow sin in haven. I dont think this is what people picture/hope for in a haven, one with sin.

lol, no, I don't consider "sin" to be good. I just don't see punishment as a proper and effective way of preventing it or changing human behaviour. For example, if I had chosen to punish my students every time they didn't pay attention, talked to each other etc, I would end up with a classroom where nobody paid any attention. It is precisely because I don't punish them for bad behaviour that I have almost no bad behaviour in my class.

My goal for society is to reduce bad behaviour, of course, and I see focusing on punishment as utterly useless. Demanding punishment is the barbarian way. Civilization has found much better ways to deal with counter-productive behaviour.

And of course, you god and I operate with two different defitions of what is bad and what is good. Most obvious when it comes to sex outside marriage, of course.

In fact, I would consider the need to punish sins to be a sin.

[Idaho]

Written by first hand observers..

Really? Which first hand observers were they? And which bits did they write?

[InsaneApache]

Really? Which first hand observers were they? And which bits did they write?

Oh come on, you know that the Bible is the word of God, no matter what they did in Nicea. Foolish boy.

[Idaho]

I like this subject, right here, but when taking about religious text you have to qualify everything with a little bit of faith, because worldly proof is likely not forthcoming.

If the Bible is figurative, and the product of man, but also divinely inspired, then it falls on the individual Christian or group of Christians to recognize that they are studying the divine word through the corrupt and self-serving lens of man. If your faith is as strong as your mind, you will learn the correct lessons.

This is circular. The righteous are righteous due to their righteousness.

[Papewaio]

The bible is a group of books. Some of these taken from Judasim some from favourite authors as selected by the Nicea editors.

In modern terms it is much like the early Japanese manga that came out west. They were dubbed 'translated', key elements were changed, and disparate stories melded to make a story arc even if the orginal stories weren't related.

The same thing can be seen with Star Wars. You have the films which are considered core with devout fans debating if I, II and III are still core, is Clone Wars considered canon or not. Whilst particular books written by approved authors is considered part of the extended universe. On top of that is all the fan fiction and fan clubs. Some of which such as the 501st got folded into the core films.

Add in Disney's takeover, fifty years and lot of new authors. Then do a best of anthology and you will have something that approaches the eclectic assemblage that we refer to as the bible.

The bible is a story "inspired by someone", "written about by others" and edited by yet others who weren't even there.

It's a best of collection done by cover bands.

[HoreTore]

Like i said, you have to qualify it with faith. The fact that it is a circular argument just reflects the fact that this entire experience we call "life" is a pointless and circular experience, unless you look for something more.

What on earth is pointless about football, sex, booze, mastering new skills, boobies and music....?

[spankythehippo]

I just want to say I disagree fully with this and hope you stay around for future threads.

I believe in concrete evidence. What's your reason for not believing in evidence?

[HoreTore]

Silly Hore Tore, I'm not here to convert you, that's for other people who believe (unlike myself) that evangelism is more important than contemplation. But if you are asking for my opinion, i would tell you that it is pointless because it must end. Put it off as long as you want, but sooner or later worldly pleasures will lose their fun. That said, we are flawed creatures, and those flaws extend to our ability to appreciate the world around us. There is a lot to love about life, but I approach the entire thing as a test of my moral fortitude. Do i always pass? No, no, not at all. But i try, and that's all a flawed creature can do.

Humanity is fundamentally good-natured, gc

Death is the end, yes. That means we will have to have our fun before it comes. Any eventual life after death shouldn't be your focus, you should concentrate on life before death.

And of course I'm after your opinions, not attempts to convert me(pigs will fly, hell will freeze, etc, before that happens)

[a completely inoffensive name]

Humanity is fundamentally good-natured, gc

Humanity isn't fundamentally anything but horny, sleepy and hungry. Violence was extremely common in years pasts and acts of brutality and barbarism were more or less accepted (many terrible passages in Bible go into detail on such occasions), but nowadays people are more peaceful and prosperous than at any time in human history. So which time period show humans in their true element? Neither, it simply shows the lengths humans will go to to survive in a harsh world and the passivity they show each other in a plentiful world.

[Sigurd]

The bible is a group of books. Some of these taken from Judasim some from favourite authors as selected by the Nicea editors.

We should lose the Nicea connection with the compilation of the Bible permanently. I am sorry to say that those who still make this connection are snoozing in class.
And it is not as bleak as we make it. The translations over all is pretty much quality work - but the history behind the meddling with and the purposeful editing, removing, adding, reinstating etc.. makes it simply untrustworthy as a canon of THE TRUTH.
Maybe some believe as GC states that the divine will get through despite all this, but I have to counter with the fact that there are over 35 000 self proclaimed Christian denominations out there ALL claiming to have the truth as explained by the canon of scripture. ALL claiming that their interpretation is the ONLY correct one. A logic which collapse on itself on the first disagreement of a doctrine... i.e Baptism - necessary or not. The Holy Ghost confirmed for one group that it is necessary for salvation and it also confirmed for the other group that it is not necessary. It doesn't take a very intelligent man to point out the paradox there.

[Idaho]

Like i said, you have to qualify it with faith. The fact that it is a circular argument just reflects the fact that this entire experience we call "life" is a pointless and circular experience, unless you look for something more.

It's not a pointless existence. It's an existence filled with friends and family. Humanity and all its flaws and wonders. I don't think of myself as an atheist, I think of myself as a humanist.

[Hax]

Violence was extremely common in years pasts and acts of brutality and barbarism were more or less accepted

I'd say that in many cases, violence, acts of brutality, and barbarism are still commonly accepted by a large part of Earth's population, it just depends on the people affected by it.

[total relism]

Really? Which first hand observers were they? And which bits did they write?

I think i will make translation of bible next thread instead of slavery or why is there death and suffering as this seems to be the biggest claim against bible on this thread.

Oh come on, you know that the Bible is the word of God, no matter what they did in Nicea. Foolish boy.

I think i will make translation of bible next thread instead of slavery or why is there death and suffering as this seems to be the biggest claim against bible on this thread. I will say people on this forum need to watch a debate and actually learn for themselves and stop watching the da vinci code code. I am truly amazed how well the media has done its job in indoctrination.

I like this subject, right here, but when taking about religious text you have to qualify everything with a little bit of faith, because worldly proof is likely not forthcoming.

If the Bible is figurative, and the product of man, but also divinely inspired, then it falls on the individual Christian or group of Christians to recognize that they are studying the divine word through the corrupt and self-serving lens of man. If your faith is as strong as your mind, you will learn the correct lessons.

"wordly proof" I think you mean evidence for based on observation. This will be great topic when I do it so stay around [future thread].

The bible is a group of books. Some of these taken from Judasim some from favourite authors as selected by the Nicea editors.

In modern terms it is much like the early Japanese manga that came out west. They were dubbed 'translated', key elements were changed, and disparate stories melded to make a story arc even if the orginal stories weren't related.

The same thing can be seen with Star Wars. You have the films which are considered core with devout fans debating if I, II and III are still core, is Clone Wars considered canon or not. Whilst particular books written by approved authors is considered part of the extended universe. On top of that is all the fan fiction and fan clubs. Some of which such as the 501st got folded into the core films.

Add in Disney's takeover, fifty years and lot of new authors. Then do a best of anthology and you will have something that approaches the eclectic assemblage that we refer to as the bible.

The bible is a story "inspired by someone", "written about by others" and edited by yet others who weren't even there.

It's a best of collection done by cover bands.

I will be saving these quotes about the claims people are making, lets see if these same people claim the same on my translation of the bible thread when facts are presented.

I believe in concrete evidence. What's your reason for not believing in evidence?

This assumes i dont believe in "evidence" i would say the reason I cant be atheist and the reason I am christian is because of the evidence [future thread]. Also in that thread if you stay around I will show it is you [assuming your atheist] who must reject alot of concrete evidence.

We should lose the Nicea connection with the compilation of the Bible permanently. I am sorry to say that those who still make this connection are snoozing in class.
And it is not as bleak as we make it. The translations over all is pretty much quality work - but the history behind the meddling with and the purposeful editing, removing, adding, reinstating etc.. makes it simply untrustworthy as a canon of THE TRUTH.
Maybe some believe as GC states that the divine will get through despite all this, but I have to counter with the fact that there are over 35 000 self proclaimed Christian denominations out there ALL claiming to have the truth as explained by the canon of scripture. ALL claiming that their interpretation is the ONLY correct one. A logic which collapse on itself on the first disagreement of a doctrine... i.e Baptism - necessary or not. The Holy Ghost confirmed for one group that it is necessary for salvation and it also confirmed for the other group that it is not necessary. It doesn't take a very intelligent man to point out the paradox there.

I think i will make translation of bible next thread instead of slavery or why is there death and suffering as this seems to be the biggest claim against bible on this thread. I will say people on this forum need to watch a debate and actually learn for themselves and stop watching the da vinci code code. I am truly amazed how well the media has done its job in indoctrination.

[total relism]

lol, no, I don't consider "sin" to be good. I just don't see punishment as a proper and effective way of preventing it or changing human behaviour. For example, if I had chosen to punish my students every time they didn't pay attention, talked to each other etc, I would end up with a classroom where nobody paid any attention. It is precisely because I don't punish them for bad behaviour that I have almost no bad behaviour in my class.

My goal for society is to reduce bad behaviour, of course, and I see focusing on punishment as utterly useless. Demanding punishment is the barbarian way. Civilization has found much better ways to deal with counter-productive behaviour.

And of course, you god and I operate with two different defitions of what is bad and what is good. Most obvious when it comes to sex outside marriage, of course.

In fact, I would consider the need to punish sins to be a sin.

I do disagree fully with your opinion on not punishing, I think without punishment or law, you get the books of judges in bible, or you get anywhere in world today were anarchy rules and millions get slaughtered africa parts of Afghanistan etc etc. I believe you are extremely sheltered oviusley 100% politically correct westerner,now mister hitler, please be a good boy, dont hurt those jews, just lets all play nice. This denies human sin and thinks that if people are in right environment etc they will be good etc. This does not follow reality. I myself [as does the bible] sees allowing sin to go unpunished and to hate justice a sin itself. i think its a sin to allow things like what happened in 1940's Europe to go unpunished, i would say so do the jews of the day and others that were killed in the ovens. Or the christian today being killed [often by beheading] in africa/middle east by Muslims for being christian a injustice deserving of punishment. As would those that suffer such a fate were entire families are murdered. I also cant help but think if your family was slaughtered in your own home wife raped/daughter raped beaten to death, you may in fact feel a moral wrong has been done and ask for justice. God is a god of justice and does indeed see things people do as a moral wrong.


8 Then the word of the LORD came to Zechariah, saying, 9 “Thus says the LORD of hosts:
Execute true justice,
######Show mercy and compassion
######Everyone to his brother.
###### 10 Do not oppress the widow or the fatherless,
######The alien or the poor.
######Let none of you plan evil in his heart
######Against his brother.’
Zechariah 7 8-10



But it is not surprising a sinner would reject god standard,as we rebel against him and love sin often [sex outside marriage].

18 For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.
1 Corinthians 1.18



I ask you what would you do with sinners if your a holy god that hates sin and cant be around it? In fact one of the most common objections to a god is if there is a god, why does he allow death/suffering, why does he not stop it. Why allow hitler to do what he did, why not kill him as baby etc.

But you also miss the entire point of the bible

We love because he first loved us.
1 john 4.19


God loved us while we were sinners


But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us.
romans 5.8


that is some positive reinforcement, but some reject. So lets say in your class you have one kid who wont listen to you and keeps doing bad, hitting,stealing from other kids etc you would be worse teacher and would be allowing not stopping/minimising bad behavior as you said, you would be prmoting/allowing it. So what do you do than

[Idaho]

Sorry tr but this stuff is getting a bit boring now. Having someone fill the back room with Scripture lessons is lowering the tone.

Can you just put it all in one thread?

[Sarmatian]

Sorry tr but this stuff is getting a bit boring now. Having someone fill the back room with Scripture lessons is lowering the tone.

Can you just put it all in one thread?

I agree, especially as the two of us will have quite an important discussion soon re your Clint Eastwood nonsense.

[Idaho]

I agree, especially as the two of us will have quite an important discussion soon re your Clint Eastwood nonsense.

My egotistical right wing yank is better than your egotistical right wing yank

[Papewaio]

One of those yanks collected dolls, the other talks to chairs.

I'm sure they would be great for a tea party...

[spankythehippo]

This assumes i dont believe in "evidence" i would say the reason I cant be atheist and the reason I am christian is because of the evidence [future thread]. Also in that thread if you stay around I will show it is you [assuming your atheist] who must reject alot of concrete evidence.

So a guy gets crucified and dies. Then a few days later he comes back to life? Sorry, that is not a believable story. To be considered evidence or truth, it must be able to be repeated. If I drop an apple, it will fall to the ground. I can drop millions of apples, and they will all drop to the ground. Hence, the theory of gravity still holds true.

Has anyone else come back from the dead? Has anyone else fed 5000 people with 2 fish (or whatever the story says)? Has anyone else been able to change water into wine?

If one were to call these feats of Jesus "experiments", these "experiments" cannot be recreated, so they are not reliable, hence they are rejected. Reliability lies in the ability to perform the same experiment multiple times to achieve the same results. There is only so much a fairy tale can educated others on.

Now, if one says that some stories in the Bible are exaggerations, what does that say about the rest of the Bible? If you read a textbook and find a huge number of mistakes, it is not a valid textbook. Same thing with the Bible. It loses it's credibility.

[total relism]

Sorry tr but this stuff is getting a bit boring now. Having someone fill the back room with Scripture lessons is lowering the tone.

Can you just put it all in one thread?

I am thinking of doing the other 13 over two threads, I think you guys are right that would be better.

So a guy gets crucified and dies. Then a few days later he comes back to life? Sorry, that is not a believable story. To be considered evidence or truth, it must be able to be repeated. If I drop an apple, it will fall to the ground. I can drop millions of apples, and they will all drop to the ground. Hence, the theory of gravity still holds true.

Has anyone else come back from the dead? Has anyone else fed 5000 people with 2 fish (or whatever the story says)? Has anyone else been able to change water into wine?

If one were to call these feats of Jesus "experiments", these "experiments" cannot be recreated, so they are not reliable, hence they are rejected. Reliability lies in the ability to perform the same experiment multiple times to achieve the same results. There is only so much a fairy tale can educated others on.

Now, if one says that some stories in the Bible are exaggerations, what does that say about the rest of the Bible? If you read a textbook and find a huge number of mistakes, it is not a valid textbook. Same thing with the Bible. It loses it's credibility.

Evidence for the Resurrection is future thread, many atheist have become christian on this alone. There is aplenty wrong with your logic and i will be glad to show you on that future thread.

[spankythehippo]

Evidence for the Resurrection is future thread, many atheist have become christian on this alone. There is aplenty wrong with your logic and i will be glad to show you on that future thread.

My logic is used in science. The computer you are typing on is a product of science. This site is hosted on the internet, also a product of science. I assume you live in a building, a product of engineering, which is, inherently, science. I believe your signature says "Test all things; hold fast what is good". Isn't that what I've been saying? Test theories, if they work, utilise them. If they don't, scrap them.

It pays to be concise in your argument. So tell me what's wrong in a clear format without the use of long and meaningless Biblical quotes that hardly reflect your argument or your point. Also, just a tip, use better sentence structure, punctuation and grammar. I don't even bother reading those massive walls of unorganised text.

[InsaneApache]

many atheist have become christian

What about christians that become athiest?