Sorry to hear about that.

 I am confused.  How can you hold it true that he was a good friend, yet still claim he did this?  You didn't lose a good friend, you just found out he wasn't one.

what i'm saying is that up until that point he (and his family) trusted me more than any of his other friends. And he was never any problem up until that point

I hope that happens too, but saying that he has been a total bastard these last couple of days, I don't think I'd be willing to go back to him, at leastfor a while

He said:

"I showed him the RRS and TWOTM Nightline face-off thinking that he would see how stupid TWOTM were being."

Why shouldn't it work both ways? Why should it be so bad for the christian guy to be himself too, and say he thinks twotm are right without his mate deliberately going out to scare him in retaliation? If you can't be a little blind to your faults around friends then who can you trust?

This has bugger all to do with religion and everything to do with velocity eleven's mate not living up to stringent expectations, so VE is chucking a tanty over it.

If VE really was a good friend ever, he would see that he's hurt his mate on a personal level that has nothing to do with religion, forgive him for seeming like a complete tool who agrees with Ray Comfort (LOL), and apologise for being a tool himself. If they have a good friendship this'll all mean nothing soon enough.

If he really believes this fairy tale sh*t and he really considered himself your friend then he should be trying to convert you - not avoiding you at all costs.  I mean if he really, really believes it and he honestly thinks you are going to spend eternity and hell but he just turned his back...

Of course, having someone trying to "save" you 24/7 is annoying itself. 

I can't put the story in context, not having been there. I mean, I don't know what your tone was, or what lead up to your "denying the holy spirit" in a conversation. If it's only the content of that statement, and what it supposedly implies, then that is a sad example of the polarizing distortion of social values that makes atheists so distrusted in America. Like biology and astronomy, religion's contributions in this are arena are baseless and divisive.

Look, if they were friends it's not because of religion is it? I mean they weren't hanging together because they liked singing the same songs on sunday. VE liked having this friend for whatever reason despite that they disagreed about God and religion, this whole debate is just so narrowminded and hypocritical, I can't buy into it. They were friends while one was christian and the other atheist, that subsumes any premise based on his christianity, they already like each other!

VE posts here on an assertive atheist movement message board, and it's only the christian that cares about how religious the other one is? pull the other leg why don't you, it plays jingle bells. The aim of this cybergroup is to "cure Theism" If a member of this group doesn't make it their business that others are or aren't theist I'm uncle monkey.

 Yeah, you're right Magilum, good points all.

Ignore previous statements by me, Velocity Eleven, I hope you feel better soon and in the long run haven't lost a good friend, but please elaborate the details if you want to discuss it.  

NOTHING will make someone turn on you more quickly or more completely than religion or some other irrational, dogmatically-held belief.

I'm more angry with religion now than I have ever been.  I want to see it wiped off the face of the earth (by peaceful means only, but I want it GONE.) 

Woah Woah Woah, he never said he hated the holy spirit he said he denied it, how in fucks sake can you hate something that you deny? It sounds like he was respectful of him, and it sounds like the christian was the non respectful one.

Well like I said, because I dont have all the information, I am just speculating.  When the poster said that there was the denial of the Holy Spirit to the friend, when the situation is highly charged already, it just seems that there was a (and I am sure this isn't what the poster was trying to do) proverbial putting the finger into the wound/an already charged situation.  I am not saying that the friend was in the right, instead I think that just as the poster seemed to be going too offensive, the friend went too defensive (kind of like a sword fight).  The friend's reaction to the offensive/defensive situation was to take the situation too personal.  I think, at least I tried to point out in the posts, that both were at fault.  The poster seemed to try to challenge over the line and the friend seemed to react too heavily and shouldn't have taken what was said too personal.  A discussion or a debate should never have an antagonistic (even if the antagonistic energies are not recognized by one side or another) power in its foundation.  And it seems to me that the way the poster tried to present the poster's point of view to the friend was antagonistic, accidently, in that the poster wasn't trying to be antagonistic but that is how the friend read the situation.  Again, both sides mis-stepped so to speak and both sides should apologize for their reaction and interaction.  Just my point of view in the sense if this had happened to me.  As I do not know either party, I can only speculate and see how I would feel or how I would view the situation if it was happening to me.

If this had happened to me when I was a Christian, I would have immediately thought of 2 Corinthians 6:14--just as we were brainwashed to do.  And just like in the roleplays we practiced in Sunday school, I would have felt a very strong pressure to cut off all contact with this person regardless of our previous relationship.

It's one thing to know someone is an "atheist," but it's another to see firsthand what that really means.  I agree that buttons were pushed, but I think they were buttons that activated pre-programmed behaviors based on conditioned religious prejudices, not the genuine feelings of the person involved. 

Coming from a Christian I would have to say that if this happened to me, I would have brushed it off as my beliefs are my beliefs and my friend’s beliefs are his. When someone wants to talk to me about the idea of their being an atheist I do not start popping out this or that point like a mindless drone. Nor do anyone I know act that way. The way I react—that’s pretty much how most of the Christians I know would react, they may or may not go into a debate over the considerations, but they know there is a right way and a wrong way to debate. I have an atheist friend, a very good friend at that, and we know (because we are both mature) how to say something and how not to say something. Me saying something to the extent "you’re going to hell because you’re an atheist" would have as little use or as little taste as him saying to me "you’re an idiot for being a Christian." We do not treat each other that way because we are friends, it seems to me that (while this friend of the poster’s went overboard) the poster was trying to dig into her friend’s proverbial flesh. It seems to me that, in some respect, that is how the poster was talking to (actually more like talking down) to her friend—so of course this friend would be defensive, when we are cornered by someone, no matter what their ideology or belief (or lack there of) system they have, that we care about, of course feelings will be hurt. I am a Christian and while I realize I am not the brightest chap in the universe, I would consider myself an intelligent person with an intelligent, seeking, listening personality and mindset. As are most of the Christians I know, none of them are some robot that is programmed to act just like someone like, say, Pat Robertson. These are Christians and they are real people with their own unique personalities and considerations and views—to just treat all Christians as mindless drones is a lack of respect that should be considered before performing.

at this current moment in time, I really just want to stay away from him... He has lost his mind

Well, the bible DOES say not to hang out with non christian friends...

He was sticking with you, with the hopes of converting you. Now that youve denied the holy spirit, the chances of that became pretty much 0. You shouldve either kept your mouth shut, or lied. Its partly, if not mostly your fault. You should know better. Religious people always have a hidden agenda.

Actually you can just call me Franklin, that would be fine…

Actually I don’t consider myself a lukewarm Christian, chap, at all. I would have to say that I am very hyperactive about all that there is to be found and discovered in this world that is alive around me. That is to say, I am very excited and I am very much seeking to see the world around me in all the beauty and mystery. I am a Methodist, if you are interested. I am conservative, and I am a scholar. And I enjoy that. I do not hide my Christianity and I do not bend my morality or my mindset. If you wish to know a bit about me, just out of curiosity, I am a very Victorian gentleman. In fact that is how I dress, in men’s Victorian outfits. I tell people I get my dress code from watching Doctor Who. Because I am very excited about my relationship with God, because I am willing to see and explore all the mysteries that God has in store for me, I would say I am far from lukewarm. Well concerning my live and let live as you seem to indicate I would have to say this…Mark says that Christ says that we are to "Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature…" Well that’s one of the reasons I am in seminary. And seminary is very exciting I freely admit. So many considerations have been made, so many new insights have been discovered. Yes I have a degree already in history and a Master’s degree in Educational Theory, but this is where my mind and heart are unified and where my mind and heart finds true joy and nourishment. That is one of the reasons I am willing to help those at my church and those at school and even people who come into the bookstore I work for seeking a bit of guidance. That is the reason why I help others, I’ve worked at homeless shelters, I have donated money to causes, et cetera et cetera. I believe that there is a right way and a wrong way to "witness"—which is more meaningful, just going out and shoving a pamphlet into some lass’s hands or going out and doing what needs to be done to help anyone and everyone that comes my way to the best of my ability? To me witnessing is more than just going up to a person and saying "if you died tonight where would you go"…the likelihood of that really causing an excitement toward God is about the same likelihood of, say, finding Godzilla having a dandy time at the local nuclear power plant. Interesting thought, but really, unrealistic. I reach out with friendship, I stand in integrity, I endure, I give my point of view if asked, if desired to know, but I take things in stride because you have to take things in stride because if you don’t you end up a bundle of nerves with quit a headache!

As a Christian I am neither shy nor slipping under the table my Christian worldview and ideas, nor do I believe that being in someone’s face is the right thing to do. I do not badger nor do I hammer my beliefs toward anyone, though if anyone wishes to have a discussion, I am always open for one. For example, I don’t think that my wearing a "Jesus is my Boss" t-shirt really is effective. I mean really. How many souls have been won by some chap wearing a t-shirt? I seriously doubt that Martin Luther would have gotten too many places if his ideas were just placed on a t-shirt that he wore about town. Of course he might have started a new trend in clothing but I digress…Instead I do what needs to be done, whatever routes there are before me, no matter how small an action I take such as spending money for the Toys for Tots or how large an action I take, like my gaining the theological degree so that I can teach future seminary students. To me I see so many avenues of development for my self and help toward others before my eyes and I am excited about this. About being yoked with unbelievers. Well if that was the narrow view toward how to understand that point of view, then Paul, Peter, Mary, Martha, and all the men and women would never have gotten out of Jerusalem, much less Israel itself! Being yoked with unbelievers doesn’t mean that you spend your life walled up in your home, afraid of even answering the telephone. I think that, in the long run, on the greater path and understanding, being yoked and not being yoked means this: I will stay true to the Gospel, the overall Gospel, from Genesis to Revelation, I will live my life for the Lord through the ministry that Jesus Christ has placed upon me, however great or small that may be. As long as I am staying true, as long as I keep my sight upon the goal of that great race I am in, as Paul might put it, then not only am I not being yoked with others (i.e. having others tell me what to think or just shrugging it off as a relativist might think), but I am not being lukewarm. I would have to say that, though this is a bit of a cliché now, the idea that suits the true definition of how one should not be yoked is to "live in the world but not of the world"…that is, living, breathing, talking, meeting, having adventures in the world, but not letting the world’s ideas and constructions (which tend to be second rate to God’s ideas and Kingdom) dictate how I live my life. Thus I haven’t created the unevenness of how it would be to try to have God’s truths yoked with the world’s considerations, thus I am, from that nature, not yoked with unbelief.

Fair enough on the preaching thing, Franklin.  Going to seminary seems like a good way to dispense your obligation to preach.

But I still think you're being a hypocrite--in the sense of disobeying what the Bible clearly tells you to do--about having friendships with sinners.  I encourage you to take a look at the whole passage from 2 Cor 6:

Although Paul, and other members of the Dramatis Personae of the Bible regularly went among the sinners to preach and baptize, they only socialized with other "saved" people.  But it is clear that you're supposed to avoid sinful people and thoughts as well as actions, because those influences can corrupt you too.  "Bad company corrupts good character." (1Cor15:33)

And since "Everything that does not come from faith is sin," (Rom 14:23) an atheist "friend" definitely qualifies as touching the unclean thing.

Good day to you as well Texttom. I hope that this day is going well for you and that you are doing well. I do not have much time to respond in my usual, have to admit, verbose way, but here are some points to consider toward your views on this situation between my friends and myself. I would have to point toward what Jesus Christ Himself went through in His life and ministry. The Pharisees did have the belief that they should, taking the faulty presupposed idea of being "yoked with the wrong people" to a faulty conclusion due to their unwritten Laws that they had created to supercede the written Laws and the Prophets and the Writings, never have any encounter with "sinners." Jesus Christ Himself disagreed, He spoke very truly when He said that He was here not to call those who were "well" (those who thought they were well), but instead to walk among the lost and bring eternal hope and awakened salvation to those who were lost. Thus the reason you saw Him ministering and talking and befriending everyone from a woman caught in adultery to tax collectors.  Jesus Christ Himself went out amongst the lost, amongst the unloved, those that society had turn its back upon, and showed them the everlasting truth of Himself as He is God...as He is the Messiah, in this First Advent (and who will return in the Second Advent).  To live today by believing that "we should not be yoked" in the same faulty presupposition as held by the Pharisees, is to (as I stated before) just might as well walling oneself up in the house and never going outside for fear of what may lay waiting outside.

Concerning what was going on in 2 Cor 6, one must realize what was going on at that time and why Paul was speaking as he was speaking to those in the Corinthian church. What was happening was that there were false apostles who were bringing false messages to the church of Corinth. These false apostles were trying to bring the Corinthian church away from loving the truth of Jesus Christ that Paul was commisioned to preach by God, and toward loving their false views and their fake selves. The same goes for the quote from 1 Cor 15:33, what we are dealing with are not average day friendships and relationships with believes and unbelievers, we are dealing with a crisis in the Corinthian church of being yoked with false teachers.  False teachers who did not know the Gospel's truth, God's truth, from Scriptural truth.  They only knew what they wanted to know and wanted to teach.  Remember and realize that these letters that we have in the Bible are not average (as today) "letters," but responses to a crisis in that particular church due to false teachers and their false presuppositions. My friendships with these people will not lead me away from having a "sincere and pure devotion to Christ" because I am not yoked to these friends of mine, I am yoked with Christ and Christ alone (that is, I am not being yoked with Belial, that is, the world and all the world’s beliefs, I am being yoked with Christ). As I am yoked with Christ, there is no fear of being yoked with anyone else, because I aim myself fully toward that goal, toward that truth, that is Christ Jesus.

...and this isn't what the Bible says will happen.  Bible says "Avoid godless chatter because those who indulge in it will become more and more ungodly."  (2Tim 2:16)  It says "A little leaven leaveneth the whole loaf."  (Ga 5:9)  It says "put ye off concerning the former conversation the old man, which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts, and be renewed in the spirit of your mind, and that ye put on the new man, which, after God, is created in righteousness and true holiness."  (Eph  4:22-24)

...unless you're going to argue that, because of "context" these commands only pertain to the Galatians, Ephesians and Timothy.

If you feel sure enough that you can resist all temptation by hanging around non-theists, maybe you should check out Romans 11:18 or Matthew 6:1 about the hazards of the pride that goes with demonstrating your piety for its own sake.

Or, you can always do the rational thing, which is my hope, and recognize that the Bible is a hopelessly error-filled book that gives so many internally-contradictory commands that it (1) can't possibly be divinely inspired and (2) is a terrible text on which to build a morality, a culture or a future.

I'm pretty much ready to cash out on this discussion, Franklin, so I'm not going to respond to your whole post.  For one thing, I hope that you do maintain your friendships with nontheists, and I'm not really into telling people what they should and should not do.  For another thing, it's clear that I'm not successfully getting you to question the integrity of your religious schema.

 But I do have one last question.  I am familiar with the books you list, and I've read many like them.  I doubt there are very many Biblical apologist arguments I haven't heard before.  I used to use many of them myself.

But I did finally ask myself, if the Bible is such a great book--is so full of important truths for life and spirituality--then why does it need so many apologist books to be written about it?  Why does it have so many apparent contradictions and ambiguities that it requires a whole industry of secondary publishing sources to explain what it "really" means?  Is God so helpless in the face of human fallability that he can't engineer a book that is  clear on the questions that matter most to people?

Isn't it much simpler, and perhaps more likely, that the Bible is just an accumulation of human texts, and the religion built on top of it isn't any more divinely inspired than any other religion? 

This is all I really have to say and then I really do not think I need to say anything more. This is, as mentioned before, off the topic of the original consideration of this portion of the forum. I do not do this out of defeat, but out of the reality that discussions should not turn into broken records, that is, discussions should not continue to say the same thing again and again. When the conversation does that, then the conversation really has very little point for its life. Saying that, consider these points that I am about to say. I realize that you may disagree with me on most of what I have to say, but I do hope that you will at least give these considerations some thought instead of just brushing them to the side. These considerations come from what I have studied not just in theology but also in my study of history, not just the skills of hermeneutics but also the skills of historiography. For you see just as great skill must go into exploring the nuances of history and all that history has to offer to say, so to, even more, because God is the author of history, you need great skill in understanding Scripture.

Whether dealing with a primary source material, say a letter from Thomas Jefferson to, maybe, John Adams, or whether dealing with a secondary material, say a discussion of said letter from Thomas Jefferson to John Adams, one must consider the context. The letter was not written in a vacuum. There are questions that need to be asked when reading the primary source material, such as "why was the letter written," "when was the letter written," and "what was the situation that brought about the need to write the letter." When reading the secondary source material, you will have to ask what was the views of the author who mentions the letter, how does the author use said letter later on in his or her work, and why did the author of the secondary material use this particular letter. If you do not ask these focused and precise questions, if you do not seek the answers to these questions, then you are failing to give full and mindful and reasonable attention to the letter that is being studied. These same skills of historiography and literary examinations can and should be used as well with Bible studies.

So too can be said of reading the Bible’s source materials. Whether you are dealing with primary source materials such as the Dead Sea Scrolls or dealing with copies of the autographs of the works that would be canonized under the heading of the New Testament, careful study must be maintained. This doesn’t mean that every Christian out there needs to get a seminary degree, but every Christian needs to know the circumstances in which the works from the Old to the New Testament were written. For example, questions such as "in what ways do the authors of Kings differ from the authors of Chronicles and why are these authors different though examining the same periods of history," other questions could be like this, "if each Gospel was written toward a particular someone or group, for what reason and how does the Gospel aim toward that group, while also being open enough to be read by all Christians?" If questions are not asked, if Scripture is treated as a vacuum, then there is failure to understand. And when there is failure to understand, there will be abuse of Scripture.

For example let’s use the story of Sodom and Gomorrah. A lot of Christian churches speak of this story as an examination of God’s judgment toward homosexuals, as if that is the only thing going on in the pericope of the fall of Sodom and Gomorrah. When reading this pericope in Genesis, you have to ask the same questions as I mentioned that are needed to be asked in the Thomas Jefferson letter, along with asking oneself as to how other Scripture writers may mentioned and may use Sodom and Gomorrah as examples in their own writings. If you begin to see how other Scripture writers point and examine this show of judgment, you will realize that homosexuality is not at all in the forefront for the reason of God’s justice being done. You see that this city was wicked, that it wronged others, far and wide, and that this city failed to do justice toward strangers, toward visitors, toward one another. Furthermore, when Sodom and Gomorrah is mentioned by Jesus Christ, He does not mention homosexuality, all that He does speak about is that this is an example of what it will be like on the "Day of the Lord."

Another example will be the used 1 and 2 Corinthian letters. Instead of just saying that these letters are needed to be treated as literal messages, such one dimensional thoughts should be turned away from. A Christian, well, anyone for that matter, who studies these two letters should use the same questions and considerations used by someone studying the Thomas Jefferson letters. Who is writing these letters? Paul. Who is Paul writing to? The Corinthian church. What was going on in the church at that time? What was going on in the overall city’s life at that time? Why was there confrontation occurring between members of the Corinthian church? Who were the leaders, who were the detractors, within these house churches? By asking these questions you will begin to understand the complex context of the letters. Other points of matter that should be addressed concern the meaning and the genre of letter writing at this time period. What points are being used in the letter, what constructions are developed through the letter, and so on? If you do not try to understand the first century letter writing, you miss a lot of information.

One of the greatest injustices today is when a church or an individual or a group treats the Bible as a vacuum, ready to have whatever they want placed within the Scripture. That is not exegesis, that is extreme use of eisegesis, and that is wrong. A person or a group must allow God to speak through Scripture as Scripture is that which has come together through meticulous development across time and space, in order to give God’s message of Redemption and Covenant to mankind, from the writings of the Torah to Jesus Christ, toward the coming of the Second Advent. A person needs to understand why the works were written, who the works were written to and for what purpose, a person needs to understand what was going on in the greater world around which the works were written. A person fails Scripture, not the other way around mind you, when he fails to truly develop an understanding of Scripture. Every person out there does not need to go out and get a seminary degree, but every person out there should mindfully understand the works of the Bible, in order to understand God’s message through the Bible.

By studying even further into the historical settings, the motifs used by the authors of the various books of the Bible, one can begin to appreciate just how great a connection there is with what the Bible has to say with what has gone on in the overall magnitude of history. For example, studying Jesus Christ, one can find various works spoken about Him throughout both the believing world and the unbelieving world at this time. Furthermore, by asking historiographical questions concerning both the works of believers and unbelievers, you begin to have a greater idea as to the actions taken by Christ in the Gospels. Furthermore, by asking yourself questions about how the Gospel spread from its Jewish birthplace throughout the Roman world, how both Jews and Gentiles came together, how Jews and Gentiles differed, and asking questions about the validity that held people into enduring all that was endured in order to spread the message of the Gospel—great important realizations are found, the greatest of all being that what was happening, from Jesus through the first century church of the Bible, happened in "real time and real place."

Unlike stories of Zeus and Hercules, the works of the Bible are grounded in logical development of history. While the stories of Zeus and Hercules were founded in the mythical world of magic, the works of the Bible could be considered ultra-realistic in that the stories are filled with average men and women, men and women with faults, men and women with hopes, men and women with uncertainties, men and women with considerations—all bound together, to the great point, toward the relationship with a very real, a very present, a very Holy, a very True, God. The works of God through Jesus Christ, for example, are founded in a very real miraculous power of God in a very mundane (but also, quite, volatile) world of Israel during the Roman occupation. When going back through reading my works on the history of Rome at this time, and correlating it with the works about the first century church, and correlating even further through the study of the Gospels and Acts and the letters, thee correlation adds up and is bound together in truth. This truth is not found in the stories, in the mythologies, found in the writings of Zeus and Hercules.

You ask why are there so many apologists for the Bible? As the Bible has lived, fully and developed, for almost two thousand years? You seem to suggest that there is no validity for the Bible because there are people like myself to people like Martin Luther to people like Catherine of Seana who are willing to go to bat for the Bible and the messages of God through Holy Scripture. I would have to say that is a faulty reasoning because then, if any argument should just have the primary argument, then why would you be so interested in reading the works of Richard Dawkins who is quite an apologist not only for atheism but also for (even greater) evolution. If I used the same argument that you are using, then Richard Dawkins would not be of interest to you because you should only focus on the original documents of Charles Darwin. But you see, thoughts develop, thoughts are constructed and evolve. The greatest of these deal with God’s interaction, through Scripture, and through the lives of men and women who went to bat for Scripture (and thus for God), because here you see the acts of reason and faith and truth and hope are mapped out

That is my opinion, that opinion that has come through my own continuing development in understanding God’s Scripture, God’s message of Redemption, to mankind from Genesis through Revelation. You of course disagree with me, but I do hope that one day you will learn to be mindful to walk in other’s shoes. Maybe you will seek to understand why people like myself not only find love and endurance in the works of Scripture, but maybe you will also seek to comprehend why people like myself find peaceful wisdom in the study of Scripture. You should, instead of just saying that you find the Bible wrong and just leave it at that, try to see why people (intelligent people like myself and the many men and women who are missionaries, who are church workers, who are everything from seminary professors to church ministers) find the everlasting, power in what we call God’s Scripture, God’s message, to mankind. You may of course continue to disagree but at least in trying to walk in other people’s shoes, you will find that you appreciate instead of demonizing these other people.

I hope that I have been respectful of you here in this little discussion. I do not want you to think that I am thinking "I’m better than you" or anything of that sort. I have tried my best, whether or not I have succeeded, well we will throw that to the fates, to answer the questions through the best of my ability through the lens of the worldview that I have developed through constant study and meditation. I have not done any of this out of sheer spite, nor do I hope that I have only made enemies in this discussion as I have no wish to do so. This will be my final message for this moment because I do not wish the discussion to turn to a broken record. All that I ask is that instead of just reading the works of apologists, instead of just reading the works on historiography and Scripture, and Christology, et cetera, really study. There is a difference between reading and studying. You read a Stephen King novel, you study a work of theology and philosophy and history. For me and myself, the same logical reasons I use when studying history I have used and found foundation when studying theology. That is all I have to say.

Some great reading material for people who don't already believe to have all the answers about the origin of the bible.

 http://tinyurl.com/34uroh