This is an argument that many atheists can shoot back at theists and it can continue into infinity. However I started thinking to myself while I was debating with an atheist earlier this week; “if he doesn’t believe in God and I do…. Who’s right?”. The answer to that was simple (and quite obvious): I was correct. That sounds one-sided and close-minded but think to yourself about what you were taught when you were growing up. Your parents drilled into your brains from a young age what they thought, or knew to be fact. So, naturally, you went along with it and defended your beliefs whenever they came under attack. Just as I did.
To any christian (like myself) the thought of atheism just cannot inhabit our minds for any length of time. We know that Christ said that if we deny Him in front of our friends, He’d deny us in front of His Father. When we think of atheists we can do nothing much but pray that God has mercy on them because at the final hour, they won’t be able to stand blameless in front of Him. Most atheists are set in their minds so trying to convert them is almost useless. However, what I find most of them have in common is either they’ve sinned so badly they feel that God cannot love them anymore so they turn their backs on Him, or they’ve lost faith. They are weak in the heart.
Atheists usually take a scientific approach to things so I come at them with the proven scientific fact that religion is proven to help people lead healthy, productive lives. Most of the time they simply don’t answer or will come back with a irrelevant remark about me personally. When it comes to certain things, atheists don’t really know what they’re talking about. They think they know all about religion, but the fact remains, they just don’t. They can’t.
To be fully knowledgeable on religion, you first need to let it into your heart. Let it inhabit you mind, body, and soul.
In the name of Jesus Christ, Amen.
Mormonism: Is There Really A Point?
This is an argument that many Mormons can shoot back at atheists and it can continue into infinity. However I started thinking to myself while I was debating with a Mormon earlier this week; “if he believes in Kolob and I don’t…. Who’s right?”. The answer to that was simple (and quite obvious): I was correct. That sounds one-sided and close-minded but think to yourself about what you were taught when you were growing up. Your knowledge of verifiable historic evidence drilled into your brains from a young age, that holy plates from God were not temporarily loaned to one man, who just happened a 19th century American con man.
To any atheist (like myself) the thought of Mormonism is a humiliatingly obvious grift and always has been. We have no direct knowledge the character Christ in the Bible actually existed, yet the Bible’s authors prepare for this inevitable realization by lacing the book with vague threats for nonbelievers (a skill Joesph Smith would pick up on and employ himself). The Bible says if we deny its ludacris stories in front of our friends, you’ll get sent to detention for ghosts. When we think of people who fall for this, we can do nothing much but sigh or laugh because at the end of the day, they’ll have wasted a lot of time, money and emotion on a thing that doesn’t exist. Most Mormons are set in their minds. However, what I find most of them have in common is either they’re judgmental enough to think they can talk about other people this way or they’re so full of themselves they can’t see they’re being duped, just like every other religious person.
Mormons usually take a superstitious approach to things so I come at them with the examples of how religion is like superstition, even though it makes them feel better it’s not based on reality. Most of the time they simply don’t answer or will come back with a irrelevant remark about me personally. Like the fact that I say ‘me’ when I mean ‘my.’ When it comes to certain things, Mormons don’t really know what they’re talking about. They think they know all about reality, but the fact remains, they just don’t. They can’t.
To be fully knowledgeable of reality, you first need to stop being such a defensive reactionary.
In the name of the great atheizmo, huzzah!
can’t do it huh„,
You can’t shift the onus, assface. You define what you’re claiming does exist and I’ll tell you whether I find the claim believable or not.
You could make the same stupid argument and sound like an equally cocky prick talking about bigfoot. If you tell me I’m wrong to claim bigfoot doesn’t exist because I haven’t defined it, you’re shifting this burden of proof on to me when it doesn’t belong there. If your dog just happens to be named bigfoot and I already said I don’t believe bigfoot exists, you can easily prove me wrong by introducing me to your dog. My bigfoot is a loosely defined as and commonly understood to be a fictional characters that roams the woods yet leaves no evidence. Almost exactly like the loosely defined, commonly understood definition of god.
Well I just had one of the worst experiences of my life: I was just verbally attacked by an atheist for being agnostic. Apparently being agnostic is an impossibility. What a jackass. Did it every occur to you that just because your mind can’t conceive of something, doesn’t mean it’s impossible? Just because living life as a question with no answer isn’t something you have the capacity to do, doesn’t mean no one else does. Sorry, this has been a text post rant. We will now continue with our regular scheduled programming.
Hey, not trying to attack you here and I’m sorry you had a bad incident with an atheist earlier, but that person was actually right and here’s why: You’re operating off an inaccurate definition of atheism. The reason this matters to me, as an atheist, isn’t because I want you to identify yourself as an atheist, but because I don’t want you identifying me as something I’m not.
See, this “living life as a question with no answer” is identical to atheism. People who claim to “be agnostic” usually say they don’t have a belief in god, but they don’t completely write off the possibility and that that’s the distinction between atheists and themselves. That distinction, however, doesn’t exist. Atheists also don’t have a belief in god, but don’t necessarily write off the possibility. Think of it like bigfoot: If you don’t believe there’s a bigfoot, like if you’re not convinced it’s true that bigfoot exists, you’re an atheist…about bigfoot…even if you don’t assert that no bigfoots exist, even if you’re only not convinced any bigfoots do exist. That’s an atheist.
Theism and atheism are words that describe belief, not knowledge. So I can not know there is or isn’t a god and still be an atheist or a theist. (A)Gnosticism can only describe the claimed knowledge that informs one’s theism or atheism.
This chart helps explain it. Hope I didn’t come off as a jackass.
Honestly, I think even the definitions in this chart put it in harsher terms than it calls for, because gnostic theism or atheism doesn’t really need to be 100% sure, it just requires the gnostic to believe she or he has convincing evidence.