Is it possible an atheist understands the Bible?

Question

Pretty sure the correct interpretation of the entire Bible is faith in Jesus Christ's death and resurrection is needed for atonement of sins, so that on judgement day the soul can have their name in the book of life and stand in the prescense of God.

Don't need the holy spirit for this one do I? I think I figured it out? Could we all agree, I an atheist figured out the Bible yes?

Belief in Jesus's death and resurrection = heaven
Disbelief = lake of fire as prescribed in Revelations Chapter 12

I didn't require the holy spirit to figure all that out did I?

Answer 1

I believe that an atheist can BELIEVE that he understands the Bible. But true understanding is in the deepest part of your soul, not only in your head.

Answer 2

Well, you did start by saying that you're an atheist, so your ignorance is understandable.

I wonder, however, if you've ever heard the saying of Jesus Christ - "There be none so blind as those that will not see." ?

Although your statements above are full of errors, you've calmly and arrogantly declared that you've deciphered everything!?

Now, to help you do a thorough study, may I point out that there are two components to the Bible? The Old Testament and the New Testament?

Could you kindly take the trouble of reading both, please?

And, after you've done that, would you be as kind to explain why is it that if, as you say, faith and belief in the Resurrection of Christ [which presupposes Death, hence, I'm not stating the obvious] is adequate for the "atonement of sins", then why do you need to do a penance?

Please read the Revelations again, this time, completely and in context; since, I guess that you know that when you take things out of their context, the very meaning changes ... and then say that that your equation is right!?

Now, why you seem to hold a grudge against the poor Holy Spirit is beyond me; but where does it ever say that you need the Holy Spirit or for that matter the very Trinity?

Don't let it worry you, though; because you do remember tha God Loves us all and He Loves you too!

Believe it, or not!

Answer 3

No. scholar man, you don't have figured out.

You have to believe Jesus Christ is the Son of God.
Jesus Christ died, was buried, and resurrected from the grave.
Christ's atonement was made if you have faith in it or not.
Your sins are forgiven through Jesus Christ by Grace.
You have to be Scripturally baptized in Christ.
Christians are Judged now, not on Judgment day.
Christians will be in front of the Judgment Seat of Christ.
Christians names are in the Book of Life now, not later.
Every person will stand before God, not just Christians.

Belief in Christ death will not get you in heaven.


you don't have the Holy Spirit. You didn't have The Holy Spirit.
and You have not got it figured out.

Answer 4

"I didn't require the holy spirit to figure all that out did I?"

No, you didn't require any help from God to understand the words that have been written down in simple English. But if you really and truly "understood" then you would understand like if you received a letter in the mail from the government telling you not to drink the water from the tap at your house anymore because they had determined that deadly but slow acting toxins had been leaking into the reservoir that was supplying your tap water for the past month.

In that case, your understanding would lead to action. You would probably be afraid if you drank from your tap all of the time and want to go to a doctor and see if you had already suffered some damage from drinking the slow acting poisons. You would want to find out what you could do to get healed. You would stop drinking from your tap and find another source of water to use.

It's the same with your "understanding" of the Bible. Right now your understanding is like when someone is half asleep in front of the television and they hear some sort of warning about toxic leaks polluting a reservoir and they wonder for a moment what country that occured in before nodding the rest of the way off because it obviously doesn't apply to them since they live in the U.S. where that doesn't happen since we are so technologically advanced.

1 Corinthians 2:14 But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

You have understood the words, but you haven't "received" the message.

For by grace you are saved through faith, and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast. Ephesians 2:8-9

1 Corinthians 1:18 For the preaching of the cross is foolishness to those being lost, but to us being saved, it is the power of God.

Answer 5

If you don't believe it and know it is not true than you won't burn dude.

What are you talking about anyway? Many relgious people and non religious people read and figure out religious texts. All you need is to be able to understand the language it is written in and some guidance if you get stuck.

You can do a university degree in relgious studies or theology without being a Jew or Christian or Muslim or Hindu or Buddhist.

Actually you don't need to be religious to understand it. A Christian scientist can understand epistemological theories of belief based on evolutionary theory or otherwise so why not vice versa.

It's no great feat.

Answer 6

You don't need the Holy Spirit to be literate, you need the Holy Spirit to believe it! Heck! I've actually read parts of Mein Kampf, the Koran, and the Unibomber Manifesto and comprehended what their point was--but I surely don't believe in any of it! I do believe the bible though!

The Holy Spirit may be working on you anyway whether you like it or not! Sneaky, huh. God Bless!

Answer 7

No, you didn't, so why did you ask? As to your primary question,
it should read "Is it possible FOR...an atheist.....etc.

Also, I am most curious why atheism is somehow always equated with the Bible. Atheism is simply non-belief, whether it is non-belief in doorknobs, little green men, or the Jesus of Christianity. But to me, the very word atheist is redundant, because even no belief is a belief. Do you believe me?

Answer 8

Yes, this is true. But remember, if in fact you did READ the bible, you would have noted along the way that Satan too knows that God is God, that Jesus is Jesus, and that the Word of God is the Word of God. Satan knows the Bible chapter and verse and so do his demons. So what does that make you equal to?

Answer 9

PLease read... you might find this intresting,, =)


The Faith of a Darwinist













Ok, so, the last couple of days have been interesting ones for me. In between writing a paper and teaching preparing to teach Sunday School, I have spent a considerable amount of time in discussions with people about the existence of God and how it relates to issues of logic, science, and faith. They have been long and exhausting and gone in circles for quite some time. Don't worry, I'm not going to try and make an argument for the existence of God or try to debate scientific theory here or rehash the Nacho Libre blog. I just want to point out one small thing that often times goes unnoticed by many Darwinists, Atheists, as well as Theists.











The point (which is definitely not original with me) is simply this: Darwinists (ie. supporters of naturalistic evolution in opposition to any form of Theistically-guided evolution or creation) need as much faith to support their beliefs as the Theist.











Let me rephrase that: A belief in an account of evolution that does not allow for a Divine Origin for, or cause of, the evolutionary process and subsequent Divine intervention within it, requires just as much faith, if not more, than a belief in a Divine cause for the universe and the life contained within it.











Atheists accuse Theists for resorting to "faith" to explain or dodge alleged inconsistencies or questions which up to that point have not been answered. They then offer up some answer to the effect that quite possibly the reason these questions haven't been answered yet is because God doesn't exist and that science could probably answer it. Basically they throw out a "Science of the Gaps" type of answer.











Well, Darwinists have the same problem going for them. Let me explain what I mean.











I've often been in a discussion and raised, one of many, objections to a naturalist account of evolution, from the fact that naturalistic evolutionary theory would require a violation of one of the basic tenets of biology; namely the Law of Biogenesis which states that all living cells come from previously living cells. When pointing out that naturalist evolutionary biology has no satisfactory answers to explain where the first cell came from, which points to a Divine Cause, the usual response is "Just because we cannot explain everything yet, it does not mean we have to believe in God. Eventually, naturalistic evolution will have an answer. You Christians always do that. Whenever there is something that we dont know yet, you always resort to this 'God' claim."











This statement in other words says, "Were not sure how that works yet, but we have faith, or belief in what we cannot see yet, that it is possible somehow and that someday we will be able to figure it out. As of yet, there are no good answers, but we certainly wouldn't dream of abandoning our naturalism." They then accuse Theist of resorting to some kind of "God of the Gaps" argument to explain things that naturalistic science can't.











The problem here is that most atheists and naturalists have an a priori metaphysical prejudice which disallows them from accepting the slightest indication that there might be a Divine Cause. As such, they have to take it on faith that there will eventually be a naturalistic answer.











Please don't mistake what I'm saying here. I am not saying that some Theists don't do this as well and that Darwinists are the only ones who are guilty of it. I am just pointing out that they are at least just as guilty.











Once again, this blog is not written to prove the existence of God or disprove philosophic Naturalism in the form of Darwinism, but merely to make an observation that is many times taken for granted. That observation is simply this: in a sense, we all have faith in something. The Darwinist resorts to faith for the unanswered questions just as much as Theists do.











This has gotta be interesting for many Darwinists. Having faith this entire time and not knowing it. J


This was written by a friend of mine...

Answer 10

i do no longer think it is available for all people to study something with an open suggestions it is extremely alien to one's ideals. it variety of feels to me that's available to jot down on a spiritual concern with out asserting a favour one way or the different, leaving the reader mystified via fact the authors genuine leaning, and maximum manifestly, the Bible does not qualify. this variety of e book in my opinion, is Karen Armstrong's 'A history of God', a ok researched artwork which i will exceedingly propose. Karen spent seven years as a nun in the previous transforming into a contract author and broadcaster. for sure, this e book would be study with an open suggestions via fact it is asserting a researched historic checklist and not spouting ideals. i attempted problematic to study Alister McGrath's 'Dawkins' God' with an open suggestions, yet got here upon it impossible even nonetheless he appeared to skillfully use his medical history and information, on an identical time as on the comparable time averting the greater mystical nature of religion to point motives to have self assurance in God. The e book appeared little better than an attempt to discredit techniques proposed via Dawkins in books basically before 'The God fantasy' and extraordinarily 'The egocentric Gene'. it relatively is possibly via fact McGrath wasn't writing with an open suggestions, he had a factor to make, and almost at recent in between his skills as a medical author, those underlying ideals in God surfaced, endorsing a perceived deceit in using technology for that objective, despite if accidentally meant. i might propose in straightforward terms books written with an open suggestions would be study via all, in an open minded way.