Kobojunkie:
How I discovered I was born-again? Well, for one, I was suddenly possessed by a spirit — I was aware of his presence and the fact that he had control over my body and even my mouth as he spoke and sang even in a different tongue. Yep, being born of spirit turns out to mean possession by a new spirit. As to how the experience pointed me Christwards? Well, I would say, I was already headed in that direction before the experience happened... I had already been obeying as consistently as I could commandments from the teachings of Jesus Christ even though I didn't understand the reason or why of Jesus Christ at that point. I honestly didn't believe in Jesus Christ at all at that point. I simply decided to obey what was written in order to maybe get God to answer my questions, and it turned out to be the right thing to do. After that experience, I pressed forward even when nothing made sense... I mean having this thing in your head or life is not easy at all and I didn't know how to get rid of it so I pushed forward in obedience and the more I did, the more I gained an understanding of who Jesus Christ is, and the more the sync up between myself and the spirit became lesson encumbering.

At the first bolded, please note that the Holy Spirit is a very gentle Spirit. He doesn't take control over you as stated in your experience.
The Bible enjoins us to try all spirits. Not all spirits are of God but all satanic spirits would pretend to be Godly spirits.
If you've blasphemed God and His Holy Spirit during your days in Atheism, you're already possessed by a spirit of hell. You'll need deliverance to be free. The spirit you saw was already in you. It simply manifested to block your chances of completely turning yourself in to Christ. He still uses you today to turn away many people from the way of truth. It's that spirit that's responsible for the grievous heresies for which you've been known on this forum. I'm not saying this to attack your person. I'm only pointing you to the reality of your experience so that you can look inwards and make possible amends before it's too late.
This my position is further confirmed by the second bolded. You never even believed in Jesus before having that experience. A simple faith or belief in Christ is the first and most important thing that must happen before you can have any Godly experience whatsoever. Whatsoever you do in relation to God without faith is sin. How can anyone be possessed with the Holy Spirit while still in absolute unbelief? The Holy Spirit would first convince you, help you build faith, afterwards, other divine encounters would follow. Faith itself is the foundation. There's no other foundation for encounters with the Spirit of God except the foundation of faith in Christ Jesus.
Such a spirit that manifested without the foundation of faith in Christ Jesus is very questionable. And, judging from the fruits you bear, our fears are confirmed.
Seek deliverance my brother. May God have mercy on your soul. Many Atheists are possessed without knowing it. Some have already reached a stage of no return. The only option before them is eternal damnation.

Kobojunkie:
Please let's cut the bull!

I used to be an atheist myself, and I can tell you that even then I fear religious folks more than anyone else back then. I personally never afflicted any man intentionally and was always racked by guilt as I did all I could not offend my fellow man given I was very much aware of how deep such things cut. Yes, I was an atheist but compared to a lot of your religious folks who attack and cast down that which you don't understand, I was pretty much a saint even in my unbelief.

There is nothing more horrible than to watch people who believe their form of lunacy is sanctioned by a God somewhere. It is just disgusting to behold whichever way you turn to look at it. From the lies below from pulpits and speakers from religious houses to the attacks on the weak by the religious mighty... it is all disgusting to watch how religious zealots convince themselves that in their numbers they are right to use the name of God to cover their filthy and terrible acts against their fellow men.

I am no longer an atheist today, thanks to God and I don't subscribe to religion either as I abhor the idea of serving under any man when I can directly have a relationship with God. And in my knowledge of God, I know for a fact that those of you, who use the name of God to perpetrate your private brand of evil against your fellow men, are the worst kind of evil out there today.

He glibly forgot religious people have killed more people than atheists, from Hitler, Putin. From movements like the Crusade, Huguenots wars, Witch Trials, Jihads etc
Theists have murdered billions while quoting their respective favorite story books. But OP doesn't wanna know that. Look at the most criminal countries from Nigeria, Brazil etc, what do they have in common? High levels of Christians. Now look at countries like Netherlands that have relatively more atheists and irreligious folks, less crimes. In fact, their jails are getting empty. You'll be forgiven to think Netherlands is more christian than Nigeria. An average Nigerian is a criminal. They would exploit and scam you at any point in time. Look at the cash crunch issue, everyone is using it as an opportunity to exploit the other. But on Fridays and Sundays, the whole mosques and churches are filled to the brim. Yet if you tell them you're an atheist, they'll call you the devil.
The nerve

gohf:
answer me this does it really matter?

Have you ever seen a child who already knows morals without being taught?

How did the your ancestors and the early men learn morals?

Jashub:
There is oga . Look at communist China . Look at how Mao slaughtered 1.2million of his own people yet, he saw nothing wrong with it. Or what about Cannanites who offer children to Baal and considered it righteousness...or how about Aboringin tribes in south America who considered it normal to cannibalize on their fellows thinking that by consuming the flesh of their dead enemies , they would also be consumkng the strength of that enemy, which they thought , would making them more powerful than before . So how do you condemn such people ?

See , each and everyone of us has his or her own sense of right and wrong, but what condemns one from another is a Standard that's above us . That's where the God factor comes to play

😏 if a child set on fire a bag of paper would you see it as wrong?

Now what if you see that paper is actually money being burnt? Is that child wrong?

jaephoenix:

How did the your ancestors and the early men learn morals?

from their fathers
And since all fathers were once sons, then even they learnt from the Father

gohf:

You never inflicted any man intentionally but did you inflict unintentionally? Was that the source of your guilt?

You are cutting the BS by saying some things I don't completely disagree with.

You can be afraid of anyone who threatens or frightens you maybe because of what you're afraid to lose. The question is as a former atheist what were you afraid of? Were those people really the source of your fear?

Okay 😅 I am not trying to be a therapist but you don't seem to have changed, there still seems to be an awful feeling left towards them. So much so that you seem to unconsciously direct it (that disgust) to anyone whom you think speaks for God.

Obviously those people are either not aware that God doesn't forgive those who misuse his name or they do and don't care, meaning they are pretending to be what they are not which is not uncommon in this world.

So does attacking or separating yourself others make you different or justified or are you still afraid?

What does the bolded mean

Kobojunkie:
I wanted to discover the truth of God, so I followed the breadcrumbs laid down across many texts until I came to one the text that began to open to me, and as I did as written — obeyed the commandments and teachings — God Himself took over and eventually showed up one day in a way that I could not longer deny there was something out there. At first, I thought it was an alien invasion of some kind, and then I thought I was possessed by some sort of demon but it turned out it was just me being born-again. And the rest is history

What did you expereince

Bacteriologist:
As an atheist I commit the number of crimes that I want and that is ZERO.

I commit the number of murders that I want which is ZERO.

I rape as much I want and that is ZERO.


Are Christians really saying that the only thing keeping them from committing atrocities and killing people is because an old book written by cattle rearers says so? That is scary.

if this is a honest question, the answer is no. They do it because God said so

I am an atheist who takes no moral instructions from evil and ignorant books but still is kind to as many people as possible because I have sympathy for my fellow human beings.

I understand that a society devoid of crime benefits me and everyone else therefore I won't commit crimes. I don't need a useless buybull or kooran to tell me that.

If you can't understand this as a religious person, please keep believing but understand that you need help.

they need help because they believe that if they do wrong they will be punished or they need help because they believe in doing the very good you claim to do?

Kobojunkie:
How I discovered I was born-again? Well, for one, I was suddenly possessed by a spirit — I was aware of his presence and the fact that he had control over my body and even my mouth as he spoke and sang even in a different tongue. Yep, being born of spirit turns out to mean possession by a new spirit. As to how the experience pointed me Christwards? Well, I would say, I was already headed in that direction before the experience happened... I had already been obeying as consistently as I could commandments from the teachings of Jesus Christ even though I didn't understand the reason or why of Jesus Christ at that point. I honestly didn't believe in Jesus Christ at all at that point. I simply decided to obey what was written in order to maybe get God to answer my questions, and it turned out to be the right thing to do. After that experience, I pressed forward even when nothing made sense... I mean having this thing in your head or life is not easy at all and I didn't know how to get rid of it so I pushed forward in obedience and the more I did, the more I gained an understanding of who Jesus Christ is, and the more the sync up between myself and the spirit became lesson encumbering.

You need a shrink, a very good one. Did it occur to you it could be a psychotic issue?
Did it also occur to you the bible was copied?

jaephoenix:

What does the bolded mean

isn't that absolutely none of your business as the question wasn't directed to you 😳

FxMasterz:


At the first bolded, please note that the Holy Spirit is a very gentle Spirit. He doesn't take control over you as stated in your experience.
The Bible enjoins us to try all spirits. Not all spirits are of God but all satanic spirits would pretend to be Godly spirits.
If you've blasphemed God and His Holy Spirit during your days in Atheism, you're already possessed by a spirit of hell. You'll need deliverance to be free. The spirit you saw was already in you. It simply manifested to block your chances of completely turning yourself in to Christ. He still uses you today to turn away many people from the way of truth. It's that spirit that's responsible for the grievous heresies for which you've been known on this forum. I'm not saying this to attack your person. I'm only pointing you to the reality of your experience so that you can look inwards and make possible amends before it's too late.
This my position is further confirmed by the second bolded. You never even believed in Jesus before having that experience. A simple faith or belief in Christ is the first and most important thing that must happen before you can have any Godly experience whatsoever. Whatsoever you do in relation to God without faith is sin. How can anyone be possessed with the Holy Spirit while still in absolute unbelief? The Holy Spirit would first convince you, help you build faith, afterwards, other divine encounters would follow. Faith itself is the foundation. There's no other foundation for encounters with the Spirit of God except the foundation of faith in Christ Jesus.
Such a spirit that manifested without the foundation of faith in Christ Jesus is very questionable. And, judging from the fruits you bear, our fears are confirmed.
Seek deliverance my brother. May God have mercy on your soul. Many Atheists are possessed without knowing it. Some have already reached a stage of no return. The only option before them is eternal damnation.

I don't know kobojunkie and he may as well have his issues but didn't you read where he wrote that he obeyed and yielded to the commands of Christ. If so then how did you get the idea he was saying the holy spirit forcefully entered him

Did he say he had absolute unbelief, I have to reread what he wrote because I recall him writing that he was already on a path to seeking God and obeying his word




My question for you now is, who sent you to say this

jaephoenix:

He glibly forgot religious people have killed more people than atheists, from Hitler, Putin. From movements like the Crusade, Huguenots wars, Witch Trials, Jihads etc
Theists have murdered billions while quoting their respective favorite story books. But OP doesn't wanna know that. Look at the most criminal countries from Nigeria, Brazil etc, what do they have in common? High levels of Christians. Now look at countries like Netherlands that have relatively more atheists and irreligious folks, less crimes. In fact, their jails are getting empty. You'll be forgiven to think Netherlands is more christian than Nigeria. An average Nigerian is a criminal. They would exploit and scam you at any point in time. Look at the cash crunch issue, everyone is using it as an opportunity to exploit the other. But on Fridays and Sundays, the whole mosques and churches are filled to the brim. Yet if you tell them you're an atheist, they'll call you the devil.
The nerve

. So in some way do you believe kobojunkie agrees with what you have written.

And kobojunkie is this what your post was about

Jashub:
No child knows anything about morals without being taught . So back to my question: where did you get your sense of morality from ? Because I know it did not come as a default code in your head.

Virtually every human society has some form of myth to explain the origin of morality. In the Louvre in Paris there is a black Babylonian column with a relief showing the sun god Shamash presenting the code of laws to Hammurabi (died c. 1750 BCE), known as the Code of Hammurabi. The Hebrew Bible (Old Testament) account of God’s giving the Ten Commandments to Moses (flourished 14th–13th century BCE) on Mount Sinai might be considered another example. In the dialogue Protagoras by Plato (428/427–348/347 BCE), there is an avowedly mythical account of how Zeus took pity on the hapless humans, who were physically no match for the other beasts. To make up for these deficiencies, Zeus gave humans a moral sense and the capacity for law and justice, so that they could live in larger communities and cooperate with one another.

That morality should be invested with all the mystery and power of divine origin is not surprising. Nothing else could provide such strong reasons for accepting the moral law. By attributing a divine origin to morality, the priesthood became its interpreter and guardian and thereby secured for itself a power that it would not readily relinquish. This link between morality and religion has been so firmly forged that it is still sometimes asserted that there can be no morality without religion. According to this view, ethics is not an independent field of study but rather a branch of theology (see moral theology).

There is some difficulty, already known to Plato, with the view that morality was created by a divine power. In his dialogue Euthyphro, Plato considered the suggestion that it is divine approval that makes an action good. Plato pointed out that, if this were the case, one could not say that the gods approve of such actions because they are good. Why then do they approve of them? Is their approval entirely arbitrary? Plato considered this impossible and so held that there must be some standards of right or wrong that are independent of the likes and dislikes of the gods. Modern philosophers have generally accepted Plato’s argument, because the alternative implies that if, for example, the gods had happened to approve of torturing children and to disapprove of helping one’s neighbours, then torture would have been good and neighbourliness bad.

Problems of divine origin
A modern theist (see theism) might say that, since God is good, God could not possibly approve of torturing children nor disapprove of helping neighbours. In saying this, however, the theist would have tacitly admitted that there is a standard of goodness that is independent of God. Without an independent standard, it would be pointless to say that God is good; this could mean only that God is approved of by God. It seems therefore that, even for those who believe in the existence of God, it is impossible to give a satisfactory account of the origin of morality in terms of divine creation. A different account is needed.


Source https://www.britannica.com/topic/ethics-philosophy

For a long time humans have done things differently. Around two million years ago the genus Homo emerged, with larger brains and new skills in making stone tools. Soon after, a global cooling and drying period led to a proliferation of terrestrial monkeys, which competed with Homo for many resources. Early humans needed new options. One alternative involved scavenging carcasses killed by other animals. But then, according to an account from anthropologist Mary C. Stiner of the University of Arizona, some early humans—the best guess is Homo heidelbergensis some 400,000 years ago—began obtaining most of their food through active collaboration in which individuals formed joint goals to work together in hunting and gathering. Indeed, the collaboration became obligate (compulsory) in that it was essential to their survival. Individuals became interdependent with one another in immediate and urgent ways to obtain their daily sustenance.
Many features of human morality could have grown out of simple reciprocal practices such as the mutual removal of parasites from awkward places. Suppose a person wanted to have the lice in his hair picked out and was willing in return to remove lice from someone else’s hair. The person must choose his partner carefully. If he helps everyone indiscriminately, he will find himself delousing others without getting his own lice removed. To avoid this, he must learn to distinguish between those who return favours and those who do not. In making this distinction, he would be separating reciprocators from nonreciprocators and, in the process, developing crude notions of fairness and of cheating. He will naturally strengthen his ties to those who reciprocate, and bonds of friendship and loyalty, with a consequent sense of obligation to assist, will result. Research in psychology and the neurosciences has thrown light on the role of specific parts of the brain in moral judgment and behaviour, suggesting that emotions are strongly involved in moral judgments, particularly those that are formed rapidly and intuitively.

gohf:
doesn't everyone already have their own sense of right and wrong, called conscience

You're mistaking conscience for freewill

jaephoenix:


Virtually every human society has some form of myth to explain the origin of morality. In the Louvre in Paris there is a black Babylonian column with a relief showing the sun god Shamash presenting the code of laws to Hammurabi (died c. 1750 BCE), known as the Code of Hammurabi. The Hebrew Bible (Old Testament) account of God’s giving the Ten Commandments to Moses (flourished 14th–13th century BCE) on Mount Sinai might be considered another example. In the dialogue Protagoras by Plato (428/427–348/347 BCE), there is an avowedly mythical account of how Zeus took pity on the hapless humans, who were physically no match for the other beasts. To make up for these deficiencies, Zeus gave humans a moral sense and the capacity for law and justice, so that they could live in larger communities and cooperate with one another.

That morality should be invested with all the mystery and power of divine origin is not surprising. Nothing else could provide such strong reasons for accepting the moral law. By attributing a divine origin to morality, the priesthood became its interpreter and guardian and thereby secured for itself a power that it would not readily relinquish. This link between morality and religion has been so firmly forged that it is still sometimes asserted that there can be no morality without religion. According to this view, ethics is not an independent field of study but rather a branch of theology (see moral theology).

There is some difficulty, already known to Plato, with the view that morality was created by a divine power. In his dialogue Euthyphro, Plato considered the suggestion that it is divine approval that makes an action good. Plato pointed out that, if this were the case, one could not say that the gods approve of such actions because they are good. Why then do they approve of them? Is their approval entirely arbitrary? Plato considered this impossible and so held that there must be some standards of right or wrong that are independent of the likes and dislikes of the gods. Modern philosophers have generally accepted Plato’s argument, because the alternative implies that if, for example, the gods had happened to approve of torturing children and to disapprove of helping one’s neighbours, then torture would have been good and neighbourliness bad.

Problems of divine origin
A modern theist (see theism) might say that, since God is good, God could not possibly approve of torturing children nor disapprove of helping neighbours. In saying this, however, the theist would have tacitly admitted that there is a standard of goodness that is independent of God. Without an independent standard, it would be pointless to say that God is good; this could mean only that God is approved of by God. It seems therefore that, even for those who believe in the existence of God, it is impossible to give a satisfactory account of the origin of morality in terms of divine creation. A different account is needed.


Source https://www.britannica.com/topic/ethics-philosophy

For a long time humans have done things differently. Around two million years ago the genus Homo emerged, with larger brains and new skills in making stone tools. Soon after, a global cooling and drying period led to a proliferation of terrestrial monkeys, which competed with Homo for many resources. Early humans needed new options. One alternative involved scavenging carcasses killed by other animals. But then, according to an account from anthropologist Mary C. Stiner of the University of Arizona, some early humans—the best guess is Homo heidelbergensis some 400,000 years ago—began obtaining most of their food through active collaboration in which individuals formed joint goals to work together in hunting and gathering. Indeed, the collaboration became obligate (compulsory) in that it was essential to their survival. Individuals became interdependent with one another in immediate and urgent ways to obtain their daily sustenance.
Many features of human morality could have grown out of simple reciprocal practices such as the mutual removal of parasites from awkward places. Suppose a person wanted to have the lice in his hair picked out and was willing in return to remove lice from someone else’s hair. The person must choose his partner carefully. If he helps everyone indiscriminately, he will find himself delousing others without getting his own lice removed. To avoid this, he must learn to distinguish between those who return favours and those who do not. In making this distinction, he would be separating reciprocators from nonreciprocators and, in the process, developing crude notions of fairness and of cheating. He will naturally strengthen his ties to those who reciprocate, and bonds of friendship and loyalty, with a consequent sense of obligation to assist, will result. Research in psychology and the neurosciences has thrown light on the role of specific parts of the brain in moral judgment and behaviour, suggesting that emotions are strongly involved in moral judgments, particularly those that are formed rapidly and intuitively.

Summarize this nonsense . Thank you

gohf:


😏 if a child set on fire a bag of paper would you see it as wrong?

Now what if you see that paper is actually money being burnt? Is that child wrong?

Wrong analogy as usual .Try something else . And please stick to the issue of morality. Because the paper bag stuff doesn't correlate with the discussion on the origins of any kind of morality out there

Dtruthspeaker:


There is really no his or her right or wrong only right and wrong, standing on their own and people exercising their power to do either of them as captured by this guy.

The truth of the matter is that you always know the right thing to do. The other part is the doing of it. (<My addition)

Norman Schwarzkopf

Morality is relative

Jashub:
There is oga . Look at communist China . Look at how Mao slaughtered 1.2million of his own people yet, he saw nothing wrong with it. Or what about Cannanites who offer children to Baal and considered it righteousness...or how about Aboringin tribes in south America who considered it normal to cannibalize on their fellows thinking that by consuming the flesh of their dead enemies , they would also be consumkng the strength of that enemy, which they thought , would making them more powerful than before . So how do you condemn such people ?

See , each and everyone of us has his or her own sense of right and wrong, but what condemns one from another is a Standard that's above us . That's where the God factor comes to play

The God factor is relative, depending on which god and which period, as same god can switch morality as a LovePeddler switches partners

Jashub:
You've not answered anything. So why is it wrong...why is it wrong to kill babies ? What justifies us not to kill babies and harm the innocent ? Secondly, whose standard of justice are you subscribing to ...and please dont tell me it's your own , because that would be stealing from God.

I hope know Yahweh approved infanticide. Was he right or wrong?

jaephoenix:

I hope know Yahweh approved infanticide. Was he right or wrong?

He was right to allow such and do you know why ?

Bacteriologist:
As an atheist I commit the number of crimes that I want and that is ZERO.

I commit the number of murders that I want which is ZERO.

I rape as much I want and that is ZERO.


Are Christians really saying that the only thing keeping them from committing atrocities and killing people is because an old book written by cattle rearers says so? That is scary.

I am an atheist who takes no moral instructions from evil and ignorant books but still is kind to as many people as possible because I have sympathy for my fellow human beings.

I understand that a society devoid of crime benefits me and everyone else therefore I won't commit crimes. I don't need a useless buybull or kooran to tell me that.

If you can't understand this as a religious person, please keep believing but understand that you need help.

Theists always have this cretarded feeling that atheists chose to be so they can win to their fill.
Also they believe anything their Yahweh says in the Bible is right. Whether murder, infanticide, stealing etc. Its all good as long as good ol' yahweh says so.
Such a warped and twisted logic is the reason why I think Christianity and religion as a whole is a mental disease

jaephoenix:

The God factor is relative, depending on which god and which period, as same god can switch morality as a LovePeddler switches partners

So where does your sense of morality come from ? And dont tell me it's a default code that's embedded within your consciousness.

Jashub:
He was right to allow such and do you know why ?

Why

Jashub:
So where does your sense of morality come from ? And dont tell me it's a default code that's embedded within your consciousness.

Did you bother to read any of my posts, kind sir?

jaephoenix:

Why

Just read the bible and you'll get your answers

jaephoenix:

Did you bother to read any of my posts, kind sir?

I read all your post except that one that had some sort of lengthy gibberish that was completely unverifiable

gohf:
did you not understand the question (topic)

I do.
You said atheists choose to be so so they can sin to their fill.
And apart from your topic sentence, you didn't explain why. You just veered off

Jashub:
I read all your post except that one that had some sort of lengthy gibberish that was completely unverifiable

So why do you think its unverifiable

gohf:


😏 if a child set on fire a bag of paper would you see it as wrong?

Now what if you see that paper is actually money being burnt? Is that child wrong?

Is there a moral point to this action

jaephoenix:

So why do you think its unverifiable

Those are scholarly works and they can't be counted as 100% accurate in terms of what they tell us about past civilizations...in fact , they are only making assumptions, and the last time I checked assumptions aren't facts

gohf:
from their fathers
And since all fathers were once sons, then even they learnt from the Father

Who is that Father

gohf:
if this is a honest question, the answer is no. They do it because God said so

they need help because they believe that if they do wrong they will be punished or they need help because they believe in doing the very good you claim to do?

So they refuse to do wrong because of god, not morals or conscience?