"I can't trust the aguments leading to Atheism, and therefore have no reason to be an Atheist"

[guno]

 

[JakeStarkey]

Guno, I am glad to see you thinking about your belief values.

 

[Agit8r]

Interesting. Watch the dif between the postings of the atheists and the anti-Godists.

View attachment 52843

If I believed the Bible, how can I believe my thinking to be true? Perhaps it is a trick of the Devil, or the weakness of my broken flesh nature. Nor could I trust my better instincts or strive to be better through practice, for scripture tells me "There is none righteous, no, not one"

So very, very weak. The discussion is not about the Bible, it is about the ability to prove or disprove one's belief in God or not.

Ohhhhh. Yeah, I don't have any such beliefs to prove. Meh.

View attachment 53517

More like i just don't care

 

[JakeStarkey]

Interesting. Watch the dif between the postings of the atheists and the anti-Godists.

View attachment 52843

If I believed the Bible, how can I believe my thinking to be true? Perhaps it is a trick of the Devil, or the weakness of my broken flesh nature. Nor could I trust my better instincts or strive to be better through practice, for scripture tells me "There is none righteous, no, not one"

So very, very weak. The discussion is not about the Bible, it is about the ability to prove or disprove one's belief in God or not.

Ohhhhh. Yeah, I don't have any such beliefs to prove. Meh.

View attachment 53517

More like i just don't care

OK.

 

[guno]

 

[guno]

Guno, I am glad to see you thinking about your belief values.

What ever you say Jeremiah lite

 

[JakeStarkey]

Guno, you are so fake.

I heard about you, the Jew with faith so wobbling that you during Hanukkah had the Menorah on a dimmer.

 

[Liminal]

Interesting. Watch the dif between the postings of the atheists and the anti-Godists.

View attachment 52843

C.S. Lewis, like almost all people that need a 'god', thinks like a child. This is common among those who need to believe in something supernatural, they need a daddy figure that will make it all better and make them feel safe. Give them a whole picture of existence because uncertainty above all else is so terrifying. The uncertainty of death being the top of this pyramid.

A very silly, superficial, generic characterization.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Interesting. Watch the dif between the postings of the atheists and the anti-Godists.

View attachment 52843

C.S. Lewis, like almost all people that need a 'god', thinks like a child. This is common among those who need to believe in something supernatural, they need a daddy figure that will make it all better and make them feel safe. Give them a whole picture of existence because uncertainty above all else is so terrifying. The uncertainty of death being the top of this pyramid.

A very silly, superficial, generic characterization.

. . . in rebuttal by a superficial thinker. Yes.

 

[Liminal]

Interesting. Watch the dif between the postings of the atheists and the anti-Godists.

View attachment 52843

C.S. Lewis, like almost all people that need a 'god', thinks like a child. This is common among those who need to believe in something supernatural, they need a daddy figure that will make it all better and make them feel safe. Give them a whole picture of existence because uncertainty above all else is so terrifying. The uncertainty of death being the top of this pyramid.

A very silly, superficial, generic characterization.

. . . in rebuttal by a superficial thinker. Yes.

No doubt the two of you believe your pop culture philosophies are somehow new , innovative, bold and groundbreaking.

 

[JakeStarkey]

C. S. Lewis is a profound thinker. All his opponents can do is snarl and bare fangs like cur dogs (see above). Trivial and inconsequential anti-Godists and militant atheists possess neither tools nor abilities to argue their way out of a paper bag. Tis what is.

 

[Liminal]

Interesting. Watch the dif between the postings of the atheists and the anti-Godists.

View attachment 52843

This fails as an appeal to ignorance fallacy, in addition to being a confirmation bias fallacy.

That one 'can't imagine' a world without order or purpose doesn't mean a 'god' must exist; belief in a 'god' is not 'evidence,' just as faith is not 'proof' a 'god' exists.

As also the belief that God does not exist does not prove that God does not exist.

Not believing in these things does not prove they don't exist; unicorns, the spaghetti monster, Martians, Zeus, the Kraken...

We rely on evidence.

Atheists arguments, while indisputably logical, all end up as blind alleys and dead ends. I love listening to well a crafted argument though, I have a lot of respect for people like Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins, and Christopher Hitchens who have always articulated their views with great eloquence and flawless reasoning. Unfortunately much of the basis for their arguments seems to rely on accepting the premise of the existence of infallible logic. Sam Harris, being a well known neuroscientist, is well aware of the studies which demonstrate that no human decision is possible without an element of emotion. His own studies substantiate these findings. Given these facts, how can anyone believe that there exists anything like some pure form of deductive reasoning? How can atheists know that their reasoning isn't simply rationalizing their own emotions about religion? Have you ever seen how Dawkins or Hitchens have responded when someone publically challenged some part of their premise? They almost invariably responded with defensiveness and anger. If their arguments are based on some pure form of Vulcan logic, why does a challenge elicit an emotional response?

 

[JakeStarkey]