Re: The "Choice" Argument

[Davin]

Then you must have some way of demonstrating that the god is able to do so, otherwise you also don't know.

Nothing you would consider...hence you, the atheist demands proof.

I am not the atheist, I am an atheist. And I'm hardly representative of the whole.

So the god is doing something really awful when it decided to kill people.

No.  God is revealing Himself to those that doubted and thus didn't put faith in.  The truth will be known to all.  He didn't 'decided' to kill people, each person has decided on their own, in this life, where they end up.  It's either with the one whom creates LIFE or in their own known destiny.

So the people decided that the god should kill them? I thought that the god was all powerful especially over humans, it seems odd that you should profess that the god bends to the will of humans.

Not even all of those.

Yes those.  One cannot identify oneself as atheist without having the knowledge of what it means to identify as atheist, weak or strong.

No, not even all of those ones. Not every atheist requires proof. If you want to get pedantic; I don't even require proof (excepting maths equations), I require evidence supporting a tested theory. All it takes to be an atheist, is to not believe in a god or gods. There are no other requirements to accurately apply that label.

You claim that the god will reveal himself to all people even atheists. Then you claim that the question is when and where.

If the when and where is after death, then it is contradictory to you claiming that the god simply doesn't provide eternal life. Because if the person persists after death, then the god will either kill the person or allow them to live.

I'm still unsure what this means, but I'll attempt a reply.

Coming back to life is not = to life eternal.  It is still temporary.  Plus, to those that are made alive again at Judgement, all of those people will be judged of their own merits...of which without Christ to cover even the smallest breaking of the Law, are deemed unrighteous as the Law demands 100% perfection.

That's hilarious.

Dude: I thought I died.
God: You did, but because you didn't believe in me I brought you back to life to get in the last "I told you so" before I kill you forever.
Dude: So you're like a five year old.
God: Pretty much.

Your hilariously childish depiction of a god aside, bringing someone back to life planning on when to they'll die isn't different than killing a person. It's like a doctor performing surgery on a person saving their life and leaving a time bomb in them. The judgment is the same as killing, there is a point where the god decides whether a person should live or die.

If the when and where is before death, then there is no purpose in theists talking about and no reason to have a printed book about it, because the god will take care of it for everyone. It contradicts with the idea of the choice being a choice because the god will lay out the option to believe in him and live forever (easy to do when revealed), or die. No much of a choice.

The problem here is that God did reveal Himself to people...and yet they denied Him.  His own people.  So I'm pretty sure that even if God revealed Himself to you, Davin, you'd find a loop-hole to determine this was not God.  God didn't jump through every hoop you need.  He's not going to do that very often, if at all.

Did god reveal himself to people? There should be evidence of a god then, you've had more than 2000 years and nothing. For all you know or I know, if there even was a real Jesus Christ, all it was, was a person claiming to be a son of god. Do you believe that David Koresh was Jesus reborn for the second coming? He walked around and claimed to be Jesus the returned son of god. And we have way more evidence that David Koresh existed than we do for Jesus Christ from the bible. What if David Koresh is the actual Jesus and son of god, and by denying him as he revealed himself, you're going to be brought back to life after you die just so god can tell you that you messed up, son.

The only option left that doesn't contradict with other things, is that it's just something some people made up.

...says those that identify as atheists by their own choice and intellect.

This is a misrepresentation of my position. I didn't choose to be an atheist, I chose to only accept things that have a well tested theory that I understand, which is also supported by reasonable evidence. It's because there is no evidence for a god or gods that I'm an atheist.