# "Jesus needed them more"



## atlashunter (Nov 6, 2017)

Good grief.  So Jesus is responsible for these deaths? Do these people actually stop and think about the the implications of what they say?

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/11/06/texas-church-shooting-victims-include-pastors-daughter-young-children.html#


----------



## oldfella1962 (Nov 6, 2017)

I don't agree with "Jesus needed them more" but if that helps them cope with their tragic loss I won't fault them for saying it. Sorry but I would think Jesus can wait - if you are going to be with them for all eternity anyway then what's the rush? Regardless I wish the shooter would have used that new rifle to take out his frustrations on coyotes or something instead of people.  or better yet start by putting the first round center mass of his own head.


----------



## hummerpoo (Nov 6, 2017)

I believe that they do.


----------



## formula1 (Nov 6, 2017)

*re:*

Although that is not at all what was quoted in the article, those quoted are confident in the eternal security in Christ and have peace in the midst of their tragedy and full confidence in Him, even in their great loss!  Sounds like true evidence of the power of the eternal perspective to me!


----------



## atlashunter (Nov 6, 2017)

formula1 said:


> Although that is not at all what was quoted in the article, those quoted are confident in the eternal security in Christ and have peace in the midst of their tragedy and full confidence in Him, even in their great loss!  Sounds like true evidence of the power of the eternal perspective to me!



It's exactly what was quoted in the article.

"I lost a lot of friends and family this morning, but that just means Jesus needed them more."


----------



## Spotlite (Nov 6, 2017)

atlashunter said:


> It's exactly what was quoted in the article.
> 
> "I lost a lot of friends and family this morning, but that just means Jesus needed them more."



It's an expression and their way of dealing with their loss. Doesn't mean Jesus needed them more and doesn't mean he's responsible.


----------



## atlashunter (Nov 6, 2017)

Spotlite said:


> It's an expression and their way of dealing with their loss. Doesn't mean Jesus needed them more and doesn't mean he's responsible.



Exactly. Just one of many feel good platitudes to help ease the pain of a harsh reality.


----------



## Spotlite (Nov 6, 2017)

atlashunter said:


> Exactly. Just one of many feel good platitudes to help ease the pain of a harsh reality.


 blame it on Jesus 

https://www.google.com/amp/www.inde...epy-weird-classmates-latest-a8041161.html?amp


----------



## atlashunter (Nov 7, 2017)

The woman in the article blames it on Jesus. I guess mass murder isn't so bad if Jesus is behind it.


----------



## JustUs4All (Nov 7, 2017)

atlashunter, have you ever held the hand of a dying person and told them that everything was going to be OK even when you knew it wasn't?  If it were your child would you tell them they were about to die and that was just how it was?

It is in human nature to try to comfort others in distress.  It is also in human nature to try to resolve personal stress if possible.   I doubt that the statement quoted would be comforting to an Atheist, but it would be to a believer.  I suspect that an Atheist involved in a similar situation would try to resolve his own stress and to comfort others.

Your interpretation that the speaker has blamed the event on Jesus is ludicrous and you know it.  Our opinions differ and that is not a problem but intellectual dishonesty is not helpful.


----------



## atlashunter (Nov 7, 2017)

They did blame Jesus although I realize that wasn't their intent. That is simply the logic of what they said. It would be intellectually dishonest to claim otherwise. It's also dishonest by definition to tell someone a comforting lie. I don't recall having ever done that but if I have or if I ever do then I'm in the wrong. I absolutely understand the need for comfort in the face of sorrow and pain. Just don't think being dishonest with yourself by engaging in fantasy and delusion is the way to go about it.


----------



## formula1 (Nov 7, 2017)

*re:*



atlashunter said:


> Just don't think being dishonest with yourself by engaging in fantasy and delusion is the way to go about it.



To them and to me it is never fantasy and delusion!!! We believe in the eternal God and Jesus Christ our Lord.  The choice you've made is your choice and respected! But your choice doesn't make everyone else delusional, except in your own mind!


----------



## atlashunter (Nov 7, 2017)

formula1 said:


> To them and to me it is never fantasy and delusion!!! We believe in the eternal God and Jesus Christ our Lord.  The choice you've made is your choice and respected! But your choice doesn't make everyone else delusional, except in your own mind!



Years ago I lost a cousin and one of her identical twin daughters in a car accident. She was in her early 20's and the girl was 7. Also in the car was a woman her age with an infant. The infant was thrown from the car and survived but the mother died. I was still a believer at that time but even then I knew that the claims of "Jesus needed them more" were just bull squeeze platitudes to try to deal with a tragic loss. It struck me as dishonest then as it does now. They were simply in the wrong place at the wrong time. It happens. Had I genuinely believed Jesus was responsible for leaving the other twin without her mother and sister that would have turned me against Christianity right then and there.


----------



## j_seph (Nov 7, 2017)

I see this as a work of the devil, nothing more nothing less. This guy was of evil, there was no Love in his heart. Just like in Job when the Lord asked Satan from whence comest thou? He replied From going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it. He does this today just the same.


----------



## atlashunter (Nov 7, 2017)

j_seph said:


> I see this as a work of the devil, nothing more nothing less. This guy was of evil, there was no Love in his heart. Just like in Job when the Lord asked Satan from whence comest thou? He replied From going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it. He does this today just the same.



Yep. Responsibility lies with the man pulling the trigger. Pretty simple. For the theist it does bring up the problem of evil.

“Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. 
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. 
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? 
Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?” 
â€• Epicurus


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Nov 7, 2017)

atlashunter said:


> Good grief.  Do these people actually stop and think about the the implications of what they say?



Good Grief!!!!  Do you people stop and think about the implications of what you believe?


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Nov 7, 2017)

atlashunter said:


> For the theist it does bring up the problem of evil.


 
For the the Christian, Evil isn't a problem.  Christianity provides the explanation and solution, whereas Evil is a subject Atheism can't even address without contradicting itself and self destructing.


----------



## bullethead (Nov 7, 2017)

SemperFiDawg said:


> For the the Christian, Evil isn't a problem.  Christianity provides the explanation and solution, whereas Evil is a subject Atheism can't even address without contradicting itself and self destructing.



There is your claim. Back it up


----------



## atlashunter (Nov 7, 2017)

SemperFiDawg said:


> For the the unthinking Christian, Evil isn't a problem.  Christianity provides a failed explanation and an empty promise of a solution, whereas Evil is a subject Atheism makes no attempt to address.



fify

You're welcome.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Nov 7, 2017)

JustUs4All said:


> Your interpretation that the speaker has blamed the event on Jesus is ludicrous and you know it.  Our opinions differ and that is not a problem but intellectual dishonesty is not helpful.



"Intellectual dishonesty" is synonymous with Atheism.  The fact that the his comment, aside from being infantile, is laughably false to anyone who reads the article is of no consequence to him.  Anyone identifying as an Atheist has to first lie to themselves and swallow it.  It should come as no surprise that people who can do so have no regard for the TRUTH.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Nov 7, 2017)

atlashunter said:


> fify
> 
> You're welcome.



Oh.  That's cute.  What's next,  putting gum in my seat?

The degradation you have to self-impose to be an atheist.  It's sad......really.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (Nov 7, 2017)

JustUs4All said:


> atlashunter, have you ever held the hand of a dying person and told them that everything was going to be OK even when you knew it wasn't?  If it were your child would you tell them they were about to die and that was just how it was?
> 
> It is in human nature to try to comfort others in distress.  It is also in human nature to try to resolve personal stress if possible.   I doubt that the statement quoted would be comforting to an Atheist, but it would be to a believer.  I suspect that an Atheist involved in a similar situation would try to resolve his own stress and to comfort others.
> 
> Your interpretation that the speaker has blamed the event on Jesus is ludicrous and you know it.  Our opinions differ and that is not a problem but intellectual dishonesty is not helpful.



I held the hand of my dying mother in hospice. When I told her it was going to be ok, I also told her it was ok to go. She then gazed at the ceiling, beyond whatever we could see and started singing her favorite hymn in her weak faint voice, then she passed. 

It was enough to tell me there was more out there because she saw it and I couldn't. 

Not everything in this life or on this earth can be explained by science or reckoned with logic. 

My wife has been an RN for 30 years. She has worked in three different hospitals on the Post Op Floor. Each and everyone of them had a presence, specter or ghost if you will that has been identified by multitudes of dying patients. At one it was a little boy, and each described him to the tee, though nobody else in the room could see him. He showed up in various intervals before the patient died. 

My father n laws mother was in a coma for three weeks. While the family was in the room one afternoon she sat straight up in bed and started looking at one corner of the room then started speaking in a loud firm voice that her work wasn't done here and she was not ready to go. Then she laid back down into the coma. The next day she came out of it and lived a normal life for another five years before passing. 

I could go on, but strange things happen in a hospital that no logic or science can dismiss.


----------



## bullethead (Nov 7, 2017)

SemperFiDawg said:


> "Intellectual dishonesty" is synonymous with Atheism.  The fact that the his comment, aside from being infantile, is laughably false to anyone who reads the article is of no consequence to him.  Anyone identifying as an Atheist has to first lie to themselves and swallow it.  It should come as no surprise that people who can do so have no regard for the TRUTH.


There is no greater intellectual dishonesty than a self identifying christian trying to point fingers at others in here.
You have provided us with more ID examples than most.
Priceless SFD.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Nov 7, 2017)

bullethead said:


> There is no greater intellectual dishonesty than a self identifying christian trying to point fingers at others in here.



Apparently there is.


----------



## atlashunter (Nov 7, 2017)

bullethead said:


> There is no greater intellectual dishonesty than a self identifying christian trying to point fingers at others in here.
> You have provided us with more ID examples than most.
> Priceless SFD.



I'm glad he swings by on occasion. It's entertaining.


----------



## PappyHoel (Nov 7, 2017)

JustUs4All said:


> atlashunter, have you ever held the hand of a dying person and told them that everything was going to be OK even when you knew it wasn't?  If it were your child would you tell them they were about to die and that was just how it was?
> 
> It is in human nature to try to comfort others in distress.  It is also in human nature to try to resolve personal stress if possible.   I doubt that the statement quoted would be comforting to an Atheist, but it would be to a believer.  I suspect that an Atheist involved in a similar situation would try to resolve his own stress and to comfort others.
> 
> Your interpretation that the speaker has blamed the event on Jesus is ludicrous and you know it.  Our opinions differ and that is not a problem but intellectual dishonesty is not helpful.



This...well said


----------



## bullethead (Nov 7, 2017)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Apparently there is.



No. Your are the top.


----------



## bullethead (Nov 7, 2017)

atlashunter said:


> I'm glad he swings by on occasion. It's entertaining.



Not me. He reminds of the ill mannered neighbor kid that just shows up in the yard during adult gatherings and kicks shins and runs away. At least I can lock my gate here.


----------



## atlashunter (Nov 7, 2017)

bullethead said:


> Not me. He reminds of the ill mannered neighbor kid that just shows up in the yard during adult gatherings and kicks shins and runs away. At least I can lock my gate here.



Every time he throws out the "intellectually dishonest" bit it just makes me laugh.


----------



## bullethead (Nov 7, 2017)

atlashunter said:


> Every time he throws out the "intellectually dishonest" bit it just makes me laugh.



No doubt, and then his claims of self defining christians not acting like Christ....
Pot meet Kettle


----------



## Artfuldodger (Nov 7, 2017)

atlashunter said:


> It's exactly what was quoted in the article.
> 
> "I lost a lot of friends and family this morning, but that just means Jesus needed them more."



It's possible the person saying this actually does believe it. Many Christians do believe everything is controlled by God.
Satan did have run it by God to mess with Job.

The Word was with God from the beginning. Therefore the purpose for the Word was in place or in God's word/mind from the beginning. 
We've actually had this discussion concerning the death of Jesus on the religious forum.

It's a tough discussion.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Nov 7, 2017)

When an Atheist kills, it's based on his individual will or his will influenced by Satan. 
When an Islamist kills, he is doing it based on instructions from his God.
Therefore I guess we could say, some kill for religious reasons and some just do it out of evilness.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Nov 7, 2017)

Is it possible that just a belief in any god makes individuals or a nation less evil than not having a belief in a god. We can look at Jews, Hindus, and most world religions and see various crime rates and how they compare with Christianity and Atheism.
So maybe even when one believes in the wrong god he gets some of the benefits of that religion's morality. By the same token he could also get some of that religion's bad traits as well.


----------



## atlashunter (Nov 7, 2017)

Artfuldodger said:


> It's possible the person saying this actually does believe it. Many Christians do believe everything is controlled by God.
> Satan did have run it by God to mess with Job.
> 
> The Word was with God from the beginning. Therefore the purpose for the Word was in place or in God's word/mind from the beginning.
> ...



Yeah maybe so. And why not if you're an immortal being simply transitioning from life in one realm to the next? Makes sense. Seems to cheapen the preciousness of this life to me.


----------



## red neck richie (Nov 7, 2017)

Miguel Cervantes said:


> I held the hand of my dying mother in hospice. When I told her it was going to be ok, I also told her it was ok to go. She then gazed at the ceiling, beyond whatever we could see and started singing her favorite hymn in her weak faint voice, then she passed.
> 
> It was enough to tell me there was more out there because she saw it and I couldn't.
> 
> ...



Testify Brother. I found that the aaa's don't like personal testimony because they cant explain it. Their go to card is what about the other religions that claim the same.


----------



## atlashunter (Nov 7, 2017)

red neck richie said:


> Testify Brother. I found that the aaa's don't like personal testimony because they cant explain it. Their go to card is what about the other religions that claim the same.



It's a pretty good go to card. Lots of people make lots of claims but when pressed for hard evidence they can't come up with it. That's why skeptics discount it and believers retreat to it when arguments that are easier to test fall apart. I used to retreat to personal experience too when I was a believer. Eventually I realized it was because I didn't have any other leg to stand on.


----------



## red neck richie (Nov 7, 2017)

atlashunter said:


> It's a pretty good go to card. Lots of people make lots of claims but when pressed for hard evidence they can't come up with it. That's why skeptics discount it and believers retreat to it when arguments that are easier to test fall apart. I used to retreat to personal experience too when I was a believer. Eventually I realized it was because I didn't have any other leg to stand on.



OK hop along repudiate the mans testimony then. You people don't believe anybody. Don't be a one legged duck either.


----------



## Dr. Strangelove (Nov 7, 2017)

"Jesus needed them more"

Without getting into why would God/Jesus/The Great Spaghetti  Monster "need" anyone if he/she/it is an all-powerful god, let me tell you a story about my ex-wife.

She was raised Catholic, in France, her home country.  She's from a small village in the Champagne region, in the north of France near the German border.

When she was seven years old, a girl from a neighboring village was abducted, raped, and essentially tortured to death.  Being upset by these events (my ex-wife, a seven year old girl), her mother took her to the village church to speak to the priest. After hearing her pour heart out and her fears, he told it was God's will.

That was the day when she stopped believing and became very much against organized religion, to the point that I had to walk her out of several family/friend weddings and funerals. 

She decided then and there that if that was "God's will" then she no longer wanted to be associated with a church, or any church, that worshiped such a being.

Telling someone "it's God's will" or "Jesus needed them more" is simply trying to pacify them. If that gets you through the pain, then fine, but the truth is the world is a dirty, nasty place and everyone is responsible for their own actions. Sometimes you can do everything right and still get hosed.


----------



## bullethead (Nov 8, 2017)

red neck richie said:


> Testify Brother. I found that the aaa's don't like personal testimony because they cant explain it. Their go to card is what about the other religions that claim the same.



Quick on answers, short on thought, typical Ritchie reply.
Ritchie, the aaa's include atheists, agnostics and apologetics. You are saying that all three don't like personal testimoney. Well thought out. 

"Their" go to card is a good card indeed. You use personal testimony as proof of your god and in the next breath dismiss personal testimony as proof of another god. If it is proof of one it is proof of all. If it is not acceptable for all it cannot be accepted for one.

I would wonder why is there a little boy specter  roaming the halls and rooms of a hospital. He is not in heaven, he is not in h3ll. He seems to be between realms. How does seeing an apparition automatically give credence to a particular diety?

The AAs that use those questions have yet to be refuted, that is why the card is so good.
Run it till they stop it.


----------



## bullethead (Nov 8, 2017)

See ritchie, you either forget or purposely ignore the personal testimony that most of the atheists and agnostics have shared in here. The testimony does not align with your wishes so you dismiss it.
You are guilty as as any other.


----------



## Miguel Cervantes (Nov 8, 2017)

bullethead said:


> Quick on answers, short on thought, typical Ritchie reply.
> Ritchie, the aaa's include atheists, agnostics and apologetics. You are saying that all three don't like personal testimoney. Well thought out.
> 
> "Their" go to card is a good card indeed. You use personal testimony as proof of your god and in the next breath dismiss personal testimony as proof of another god. If it is proof of one it is proof of all. If it is not acceptable for all it cannot be accepted for one.
> ...


I've never understood why the powers that be here on GON chose to lump Apologetics in with Atheist and Agnostics. I suppose that same person thinks Mormons are space ship flying devil worshipers as well???


----------



## bullethead (Nov 8, 2017)

Miguel Cervantes said:


> I've never understood why the powers that be here on GON chose to lump Apologetics in with Atheist and Agnostics. I suppose that same person thinks Mormons are space ship flying devil worshipers as well???



Possibly for balance. I enjoy the input the feedback. I learn from the apologists.


----------



## atlashunter (Nov 8, 2017)

red neck richie said:


> OK hop along repudiate the mans testimony then. You people don't believe anybody. Don't be a one legged duck either.



No need to really. You assume only the supernatural can explain those things. I don't.


----------



## atlashunter (Nov 8, 2017)

Dr. Strangelove said:


> "Jesus needed them more"
> 
> Without getting into why would God/Jesus/The Great Spaghetti  Monster "need" anyone if he/she/it is an all-powerful god, let me tell you a story about my ex-wife.
> 
> ...


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Nov 8, 2017)

atlashunter said:


> Every time he throws out the "intellectually dishonest" bit it just makes me laugh.



I wasn't the one who initially threw it out if you noticed.  Guess it's not just me.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Nov 8, 2017)

Artfuldodger said:


> It's possible the person saying this actually does believe it. Many Christians do believe everything is controlled by God.
> Satan did have run it by God to mess with Job.
> 
> The Word was with God from the beginning. Therefore the purpose for the Word was in place or in God's word/mind from the beginning.
> ...



A little off topic (or maybe not) but what exactly does the phrase "the word was with god from the beginning" mean?"  does this mean literally written words or some other definite record keeping to be passed along to tell the stories, or what?


----------



## atlashunter (Nov 8, 2017)

SemperFiDawg said:


> I wasn't the one who initially threw it out if you noticed.  Guess it's not just me.



Don't care. It's still funny coming from you.


----------



## hummerpoo (Nov 8, 2017)

oldfella1962 said:


> A little off topic (or maybe not) but what exactly does the phrase "the word was with god from the beginning" mean?"  does this mean literally written words or some other definite record keeping to be passed along to tell the stories, or what?



Google "John 1:2 Commentary"
You will get plenty.
It's important to read several to get a broader understanding.
I haven't looked, but would say that looking a John 1:1, in most of the commentaries would be helpful; if you stay with it John 1:4 will add even more.

Biblegateway and Biblehub are sure to show up and they will have a selection of commentaries.


----------



## j_seph (Nov 9, 2017)

oldfella1962 said:


> A little off topic (or maybe not) but what exactly does the phrase "the word was with god from the beginning" mean?"  does this mean literally written words or some other definite record keeping to be passed along to tell the stories, or what?


John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Word is refering to Jesus 

1:1 In the beginning - (Referring to #Gen 1:1|, and Prov 8:23.) When all  things began to be made by the Word: in the beginning of heaven and  earth, and this whole frame of created beings, the Word existed, without  any beginning. He was when all things began to be, whatsoever had a  beginning. The Word - So termed #Psa 33:6|, and frequently by the  seventy, and in the Chaldee paraphrase. So that St. John did not borrow  this expression from Philo, or any heathen writer. He was not yet named  Jesus, or Christ. He is the Word whom the Father begat or spoke from  eternity; by whom the Father speaking, maketh all things; who speaketh  the Father to us. We have, in #John 1:18|, both a real description of  the Word, and the reason why he is so called. He is the only begotten  Son of the Father, who is in the bosom of the Father, and hath declared  him. And the Word was with God - Therefore distinct from God the Father.  The word rendered with, denotes a perpetual tendency as it were of the  Son to the Father, in unity of essence. He was with God alone; because  nothing beside God had then any being. And the Word was God - Supreme,  eternal, independent. There was no creature, in respect of which he  could be styled God in a relative sense. Therefore he is styled so in  the absolute sense. The Godhead of the Messiah being clearly revealed in  the Old Testament, (#Jer 23:7|; Hos 1:6; #Psa 23:1|,) the other  evangelists aim at this, to prove that Jesus, a true man, was the  Messiah. But when, at length, some from hence began to doubt of his  Godhead, then St. John expressly asserted it, and wrote in this book as  it were a supplement to the Gospels, as in the Revelation to the  prophets.


----------



## oldfella1962 (Nov 9, 2017)

j_seph said:


> John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
> Word is refering to Jesus
> 
> 1:1 In the beginning - (Referring to #Gen 1:1|, and Prov 8:23.) When all  things began to be made by the Word: in the beginning of heaven and  earth, and this whole frame of created beings, the Word existed, without  any beginning. He was when all things began to be, whatsoever had a  beginning. The Word - So termed #Psa 33:6|, and frequently by the  seventy, and in the Chaldee paraphrase. So that St. John did not borrow  this expression from Philo, or any heathen writer. He was not yet named  Jesus, or Christ. He is the Word whom the Father begat or spoke from  eternity; by whom the Father speaking, maketh all things; who speaketh  the Father to us. We have, in #John 1:18|, both a real description of  the Word, and the reason why he is so called. He is the only begotten  Son of the Father, who is in the bosom of the Father, and hath declared  him. And the Word was with God - Therefore distinct from God the Father.  The word rendered with, denotes a perpetual tendency as it were of the  Son to the Father, in unity of essence. He was with God alone; because  nothing beside God had then any being. And the Word was God - Supreme,  eternal, independent. There was no creature, in respect of which he  could be styled God in a relative sense. Therefore he is styled so in  the absolute sense. The Godhead of the Messiah being clearly revealed in  the Old Testament, (#Jer 23:7|; Hos 1:6; #Psa 23:1|,) the other  evangelists aim at this, to prove that Jesus, a true man, was the  Messiah. But when, at length, some from hence began to doubt of his  Godhead, then St. John expressly asserted it, and wrote in this book as  it were a supplement to the Gospels, as in the Revelation to the  prophets.



Clear as mud now!


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Nov 9, 2017)

atlashunter said:


> Don't care. It's still funny coming from you.



I found it amusing also.


----------

