Atheists Say the NuTTiEsT Things!

The Only Failure With Prayer Is Atheists' Misunderstanding Of It

2023-05-29T09:39:00.000-05:00

The Atheist will claim prayer is useless because God should prove Himself by giving the Atheist whatever he or she prays for.

Here's an example:

"If God is real, then I want proof by being given 6 winning lottery numbers."

This demontrates a fundamental misunderstanding on the part of the skeptic. Prayer is not the same as the Genie granting a wish to Aladdin, or Santa Claus giving children the toys they ask for.

Prayer is conversation. It doesn't necessarily involve asking for stuff. And when it comes to asking, there's no guarantee that the answer is "yes".

God is not interested in winning souls by giving away toys and money. God isn't "Wheel Of Fortune" or "The Price Is Right". This idea on the part of Atheists is insulting. God condescended to certain people because He had a purpose in doing so. If you want to see what God is truly looking for, just read the Book Of Job.

The Bible also mentions the times when the prayers of Jesus failed because of a lack of faith on the part of the beneficiaries (Matt. 13:56-58). If the recipient was skeptical the prayers for healing failed.

So let's say God lets the Atheist have the 6 winning numbers plus the Powerball. The Atheist may say "thank you Jesus" then proceed to blow that money on toys and a party hearty lifestyle until it's all gone, as most Lotto winners are prone to do. Remember the Parable of The Progical Son? Except the Atheist may say "God prove yourself again by giving me more" instead of begging for his Dad's forgiveness.

God's answer might be"Tough luck, Chuck, you had your chance. When you had the means, did you do anything to honor me past your little thank you? Did you bother to think I might have given you this money for a greater purpose? You think I'm a fool, yet you're broke once more and still headed for an afterlife of misery."

Atheists claim they'll only believe if they receive what they have no right to expect. Christians, receiving no earthly riches, are thankful for the grace given to them by a God who sacrificed His Child for the sake of those who had no right to expect anything.

Think about it, Skeptics.

Atheists Need To Read The Bible Before Commenting On It

2023-01-28T10:39:00.007-06:00

An Atheist posted this in a religion forum.

Hear me out. Until I was 20 I was sure there was < Sunkist62 > 2023-01-28 07:47

a being who could see everything I did & who didn't like most of it.He seemed to care about the minutia of my life, like on what day to worship, eat meat, or fish on Fridays.
And yet, he let earthquakes & hurricanes, floods & fire destroy entire communities, ignoring the "saints" among them who followed the assigned rules.

Eventually, I realized that I didn't believe there was such a being. It didn't seem reasonable.
I stand against forcing anyone to pray; in schools, football fields, etc. It's not Constitutional

Perhaps this Atheist should have paid more attention to the Bible. Nowhere does God promise that no harm will come to His People. God promised his protection, but like any good parent, God knows that adversity can build character. God isn't a cosmic Santa Claus. He doesn't guarantee paradise on Earth until the time comes for the end of all things. All things ultimately work towards a good end, and it is for the people of God to understand what that ultimate good is.

Complaining about forced prayer is irrelevant, and doesn't help this person's stance. Prayer is communication with God. Any good parent appreciates communication. Even His Son provided a model for that communication.

My message to Atheists is to pay better attention and learn who God really is. These rants like the one I'm citing only show how ignoarant the average Atheist really is when it comes to the God of the Bible.

'Nuff said.

Where Atheism Fails

2022-12-31T10:05:00.001-06:00

So, where does Atheism fail? That answer is really quite simple: from the beginning.

Atheism starts out by taking an illogical position and assumes it to be true.

The Atheist will say "gods don't exist", and when I ask for proof of this truth claim, I'll be told "You can't prove a negative" and "the burden of proof is on the believer". Not only are these brush-offs both fallacies, but they fail to address the reason for God's supposed non-existence.

Both Richard Dawkins, the great Evolutionist, and Christopher Hitchens, the Vanity Fair opinion writer, tried to prove Atheism in their own ways. Dawkins did a horrible job of making his case and proved his field is science, not philosophy. Hitchens wrote a bitter polemic against God's existence but didn't quite state that God isn't real. He at least was still willing to consider the matter up to the point of his death from cancer.

But the problem for Atheists remains: there is more evidence for the existence of God than there is proof that God isn't real. And even worse: lack of proof (as Atheists claim) doesn't make their case. If a murderer erases all the evidence, does it mean the crime never occurred? Atheists have a real conundrum here, and yet most of them refuse to admit that it takes faith to believe in Atheism.

Faith.

Remember that. Atheism may require even more faith than belief in God.

'Nuff said.

If you're pro life, you're now a "Religious Extremist"

2022-07-30T10:59:00.007-05:00

The recent decision by the United States Supreme Court to make abortion a States' Rights issue has Atheists all over the Internet up in arms. Groups like American Atheists and Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) label anybody who's pro-life a "religious extremist", as if you have to believe in God in order to be pro-life.

Sorry guys, but I was pro-life long before I started going to church or even became a Republican. I became a parent, and as I held my beautiful daughter I realized that I coud never support the killing of an innocent viable human being.

Most atheists are political liberals, and that means most of them do not believe that human life has its own intrinsic value. It's left up to the individual to decide if they're carrying a baby or a fetus. A baby has value. A fetus is worthless to the point of being treated as something less than human. The fetus has simply been dehumanized by the law, treated as a non-person until the baby is given a name. A non-person can't be murdered, and this loophole in the law makes it open season on otherwise viable humans.

In the Atheist world view, God has been eliminated and the human being has become God's replacement, holding power over life and death based on a person's whims.

Destroying the egg of a bald eagle carries the fine of 5000.00 plus jail time:

https://www.dividedstates.com/abortion-eagle%e2%80%99s-egg-vs-human-fetus/

An egg is not an eagle. It has the potential to hatch as an eagle. Yet the egg is assigned more value than a potential live person.

There is something seriously wrong with a society that places less value on a human than on a bird, and labels pro-humans "extremists".

2022-05-06T14:34:00.005-05:00

Posted in a Craigslist forum:

Tax the anti-abortion churches .. < nonukesgal > 2022-05-06 11:21

Why should I have to pay road taxes, property taxes, etc. etc. when churches are not paying their fair share..Subsidizing religion is nothing but welfare for the god fearing!

Does Ms. nonukes understand that road maintenance taxes are collected as part of taxes on gasoline?

This is funny, especially since the person identifiying herself as nonukesgal has boasted in the past about driving an electric car. Perhaps she should consider paying her "fair share" of road taxes before harping on churches.

Churches pay their own utility bills, maintenance fees, and even "police and fire protection fees" in lieu of property taxes.

So what does Ms. nonukes think she's helping to subsidize? Does she understand the tax system at all?

Dumb Question: "Who Created God?"

2022-04-28T08:34:00.004-05:00

The Atheist asks: "Who created God? and if God can exist without a creator, using the same principle, why can’t humans and all the living beings exist without a creator?"

Because we are finite, that's why, and self-creation isn't possible.The Universe is finite according to the famous Dr. Einstein and Dr. Lemaitres, and no one has proven them wrong.

This continues to be a common attack by Atheists who are ignorant of the science they claim to base their belief system upon. Once more, we Believers have shown that we are logical and rational.

Our existence has a necessary proven cause, so we have to look at beginnings.

For a more detailed explanation of existence, read my previous blog entry:

https://atheist-nutters.blogspot.com/2019/09/logic-demands-creator.html

'Nuff said.

Big Mistake Atheists Make: Absolutist Claims

2022-04-10T12:01:00.001-05:00

What am I talking about? Atheists make truth claims that are unproven yet treated as fact.

A big example:

CLAIM: "There is no empirical evidence for the existence of God."

This is an unproven truth claim and the burden of proof rests on the person making it.

The Atheist must prove that:

A: No empirical proof for God exists anywhere in the Universe.

B: Even more important, that our Universe ISN'T that empirical proof. After all, if God did create everything (as I believe), we have the proof all around us, which we can see, feel, and experience all the time.

The Atheist cannot hide behind the "you can't prove a negative" excuse without admitting Atheism is also a faith-based understanding of the Universe similar to a Believer's faith.

Here's another:

CLAIM: "No Biblical Gospel was written by a witness to the events described in that Gospel."

First of all, anonymous authorship of a Gospel doesn't mean the writer wasn't a witness. On top of that, it doesn't negate the truthfulness of the narrative.

Also, the Atheist forgets the Gospel According to John. It doesn't name John as the author, but the weight of scholarship leaves us no other logical possibility. Even when taking a minimalist view, the Gospel claims that it was written by one of the 12 disciples at the Last Supper, who would have been an eyewitness to the ministry of Jesus. Any other explanation makes no logical sense.

And then we have the foundational claim of Atheism: "God Doesn't Exist". Not "I see no compelling evidence but I'm willing to look at some." That would imply Agnosticism. It's simply that "God doesn't exist and I can't prove a negative, so the burden is on you, Believer."

I have dealt with this in a previous post:

https://atheist-nutters.blogspot.com/2019/09/logic-demands-creator.html

Not only is God necessary but I don't need empirical evidence to prove He exists. Logic, which is mathematical in nature, clearly shows that God is not only real, He is NECESSARY for everything else to exist. Even the science of Quantum Mechanics leaves open the possibility of God's existence.

What does that leave the Atheist? FAITH, pure and simple.

'Nuff said.

Logic And Reason?

2021-11-11T11:17:00.004-06:00

I've been told that Atheists have "logic and reason" while Christians have "superstition and fear".

Yet, when Believers challenge online Atheists to support their beliefs with logic and reason, the conversation gets dragged down to an insult-fest in which the Atheist hurls obscenities in an attempt to intimidate the Believer.

This is completely unnecessary and accomplishes nothing. If Atheism is considered the "default" position and is so logical, why do Atheists have such trouble arguing LOGICALLY in defense of their beliefs?

And yes, Atheism is a non-religious belief system. Atheists have a tough position to defend. The Atheist not only needs to prove God doesn't exist, the Atheist must demonstrate that God is impossible.

The Believer has a much easier time logically defending the existence of God because the Believer's position is PROVABLE. Despite an Atheist's claims of a lack of evidence for God, there are plenty of people who have seen evidence in a variety of ways. On top of that, lack of "evidence" doesn't mean God doesn't exist. God could choose to remain a mystery.

I personally believe that there is plenty of evidence for God. Besides personal revelation, the fact remains: the universe we live in stands as evidence of God's existence. This claim drives Atheists crazy because there is no way to refute it without proving God is impossible.

Also, there are many scientists and other highly educated people who have become convinced that not only does God exist, but His existence is necessary. In other words, nothing would exist without God.

This presents Believers with a golden opportunity to open a dialogue with the Atheist, as long we behave as the Bible dictates with "gentleness and respect".

New Oxymoron: "Non-Believing Christian"

2021-02-28T16:39:00.006-06:00

I just saw a blog featuring commentary by a "non-believeing Christian". I guess this is a person who is in fact an Atheist but follows the teachings of Jesus?

There's a big problem with this. First of all, a "Christian" as defined in the Bible (where the term was first described) is a person who mimics the life of Christ.

"See?" the Atheist would say. "There's no conflict here." But wait: if you're a Christian you're supposed to be a follower of the Master.

What did the Master teach us? That greatest commandment of all is to "love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul and mind, and love your neighbor as yourself."

So Jesus taught us that the number one priority is to love God. Kind of hard to do if you don't believe in God.

Jesus also taught us that He in fact was not only God's Son, but in fact he was God in the flesh.

To be a self professed "non-believing Christian" you need to be intellectually dishonest, a cherry-picker who believes in those teachings that don't offend those tender Atheist sensibilities.

I have a simple answer. If you're just looking for some feel-good philosophy to pattern your life after, may I suggest you study Bhudda or Confucius? If you want to be a true follower of Jesus, you need to be willing to accept ALL the teachings of Jesus, not just what makes you feel good. Jesus didn't come here to make us feel better. He came here to fulfill the perfect will of the Father, and that wasn't always pretty. But neither is the sin we need forgiveness for.

Think about it.

'Nuff said.

Handling Atheist Trolls: a response

2020-12-28T11:50:00.000-06:00

Here's an interesting and somewhat unintentionallly humorous post on the Atheist Revolution blog concerning trolls:

https://www.atheistrev.com/2010/07/blogging-tip-20-handling-christian.html

I'll respond to particular points concerning the actions of Atheist trolls on my blog and other websites. Let it remain a fact that there are lots of Atheist trolls posting banal responses against Christianity.

"Start by accepting that Christian trolls will require some sort of response."

Atheist trolls are trying to provoke a response, vs. discussing a point, just like the Christians they accuse.

"With sufficient time, every atheist blog will attract Christian trolls like moths to a flame. Some hope to convert you and your readers. Others come to cause trouble."

The same goes for Christian blogs, the difference being most Atheists come to cause trouble.

"Write a comment policy. Chances are, you'll end up modifying it a few times as you encounter more trolls. But you should put it together now and refer suspected trolls to it."

I have a comment policy as well but Atheist trolls ignore it and try to litter my blog with obscenities anyway. The only way to flush these people is to pre-approve every comment. Many have been booted simply because they hurled a bunch of f-bombs or dumped a truckload of tired old links to Atheist websites. I'm not here to promote the same old garbage from sites like evilbible dot com.

"Use moderation sparingly, selectively, and only when necessary."

Unfortunately Atheists make that a frequent need with their potty mouthed responses.

"Recognize the toxic effects a Christian troll can have, and don't let it get to that point."

Here's the difference: I want the readers to see how toxic militant Atheists are, so I welcome them to make as many stupid remarks as they like, as long as it's not obscenity-laden or loaded down with a bunch of silly links. Any fool can post a google bomb. I'm looking for points to discuss.

The issue is that most Atheists do not wish to discuss anything. They just show up to your blog to play "pigeon chess". Reasonable Atheists are somwhat rare or at least they don't post much.

By Atheists' definition a "troll" is anybody who disgrees with their secular dogma. I know this through experience. I've been banned from Atheist blogs for simply challenging their posts. Christians are allowed as long as they shut up and don't mention anything about their beliefs.

"If you want thoughtful people to comment on your posts, allowing Christian trolls to run wild on your blog probably isn't going to help matters."

I wish there were more thoughful Atheists posting on my blog.

'Nuff said.

Atheists Against Public Prayer: Same Old Song and Dance

2020-09-06T09:43:00.004-05:00

Once again, an internet Atheist is rehashing the shopworn argument against public prayer. This time it's a guy on the Atheist Revolution blog known as Vjack, quoting the same verses from Matthew:

https://www.atheistrev.com/2007/07/public-prayer.html

"The book many Christians seek to elevate above all other books might not be clear about much, but it seems fairly clear in discouraging public prayer. Matthew 6:5 - 7 says:

5. And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.
6. But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly.
7. But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking.

Pretty clear, isn't it? Public prayer is compared to hypocrisy and is discouraged while private prayer is valued."

No Vjack, evidently it isn't clear... to you. In that very same Bible, the Apostle Paul encourages us:

16 Rejoice always, 17 pray without ceasing, 18 give thanks in all circumstances; for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus for you.

1 Thessalonians 5: 16-18

So how are we supposed to pray without ceasing? Are we never supposed to leave our prayer closet? I'm sure that would make a lot of Village Atheists happy, but it just isn't realistic.

The very same Bible that Vjack quoted is full of examples of people praying in public. Even Jesus prayed in public. So what is Jesus telling the people about prayer? To hide every time you want to pray?

Look at the wording of the verses in Matthew. Jesus is specifically citing the prayer of people who make a show of their faith to impress others. Of course private prayer is encouraged. Jesus took time alone to fast and talk with The Father.

This Atheist is trying to convince us to be ashamed of our faith and to hide it from public display at all costs, based on his MISunderstanding of Scripture.

Next time an Atheist tries to educate you about your faith, just read the Bible. You'll discover that Atheists DON'T read the Bible, but simply google and cherry-pick verses in their weak arguments. It doesn't take a Bible Scholar to easily shred an Atheist's criticism of what Atheists clearly don't understand.

'Nuff said.

Extremism Is in The Eye Of The Beholder

2020-07-25T09:21:00.000-05:00

An Atheist in a blog posted this:

And despite the cries of our opponents, most atheists really aren't very good at extremism. The religious are very good at extremism.

To the Atheist everything a Christian believes is extreme, and acting on that belief is considered extremism.

Atheist extremism is hardly mentioned, however, because it usually results in the creation of governments like the Soviet Union or the Peoples Republic of China.

If you want to see a good example of Atheist extremism, watch the current wave of ANTIFA riots in major US cities. Atheism is a core belief of Communists as they believe religion is a stumbling block to achieving their idea of Utopia.

So tell me, who is more dangerous: a group of nuns who won't offer to pay for birth control for their employees, or a mob of masked thugs destroying public and private property?

The fact is, Atheism metastaizes into radical movements like Antifa.

Think about it.

American Atheists Doesn't Care About Loss Of A Paycheck

2020-07-08T11:46:00.002-05:00

Once again, American Atheists, a haven for intellectual dishonesty, is spinning another false narrative narrative about religious organizations. Their issue is about small business loans:

http://www.feedspot.com/?dadi=1#feed/fof_fo_1688244__f_4977406/article/6262666582?dd=4311523148070748

The focus and purpose of the AA blog entry is to bash President Trump AND religious organizations.

“Due to the Trump Administration’s unwillingness to provide full disclosure, we have had to work with limited data. Yet the picture is clear: this is an unprecedented giveaway to religious organizations,” said Alison Gill, Vice President of Legal and Policy at American Atheists.

“In two months, the Trump Administration has given churches and religious schools more money than double the CDC’s annual budget of "6.5 Billion” said Nick Fish, president of American Atheists. “If that doesn’t make it crystal clear what this administration’s priorities are, nothing will.

Here's what American Atheists doesn't bother to recognize: these are SMALL BUSINESS loans. There are specific qualifications for receiving these loans. These religious organizations run schools and day care centers. These places employ PEOPLE, and are thus regulated by the government where it concerns pay and taxation. When it comes to providing services, they are businesses and run like businesses.

Remember the big issue made of religious organizations being held to the same non-discriminatory hiring practices concerning the LQBTQ community as secular businesses? If those policies stand, that also means the GOVERNMENT regulates the business side of a religious organization, so they should qualify as a business.

Small businesses are doing whatever they can to survive. Church based businesses to not want to terminate employees. Religious organizations still pay utility bills and are levied police and fire protection "fees". The money for this has been cut off due to COVID 19 lockdowns. These loans are a necessity for EVERY small business that is struggling, including a church day care center or school.

The sad fact is, public schools are closed all over the U.S. and the employees of those public schools still receive a paycheck for effectively doing NOTHING. Hoe many billions is this costing the taxpayers? Far more more than a few SBA loans to private schools.

Unfortunately, American Atheists' attitude is, "if you work for a private school, tough luck Charlie."

'Nuff said.

Now Let's Tear Down the Jesus Statues!

2020-06-27T08:23:00.002-05:00

This may be one of the silliest arguments of all time. The fact that "caucasian" inlcudes a wide group of people is virtually ignored by the average protester. Here's a gem by Shaun King, a spokesman for the Anti White Jesus Movement. I don't know if Mr. King is an atheist, but lots of Atheists are reposting his tweets. In attacking traditional renderings of Jesus:

“They are a form of white supremacy,” King tweeted about the monuments.
“Always have been,” King tweeted. “In the Bible, when the family of Jesus wanted to hide, and blend in, guess where they went? EGYPT! Not Denmark. Tear them down.”

Uh, sorry Mr. King, but is it possible that Jesus' parents took Him to Eqypt because it was 1000's of miles closer to Palestine? Not to mention that Denmark probably didn't exist as a civilized country? But hey, let's not let facts get in the way of a compelling narrative, right?

Egyptians were not all dark brown. Just look at the renderings of the ancient Egyptian nobles that have been preserved through time.

Folks, we don't know exactly what Jesus looked like, but we do know that not all Middle Easterners are brown. It seems that purpose of the argument is to attack white supremacy, but it's being done by forcing Jesus into another stereotype instead.

If I was to say all Asians look alike I'd be called a racist. Yet it's not racist to make the same claim in trying to describe Jesus' appearance.

So who are the racists here?

Think about it.

The Latest Tomfoolery From FFRF

2020-05-11T16:03:00.003-05:00

Here we go again. It's that wonderful group, the Freedom From Religion Foundation, those staunch "defenders" of the Constitution, creating an attack ad against the churches during the COVID 19 pandemic.

https://www.freethoughttoday.com/vol-37-no-04-may-2020/feeling-helpless-or-angry-heres-how-to-fight-back

Blasphemy... an Atheist hobby

The article is as follows:

Feeling helpless or angry? Here’s how to fight back.

Many of you have contacted FFRF, angry and worried that governors or other officials across the country are exempting churches and religious worship from the “safer at home” orders necessary to stop the spread of the coronavirus.

Why only churches? There are more health risks at your local Walmart or CostCo store.

If you’re stuck at home, perhaps feeling a little helpless, isolated and angry that these churches are risking your life and the lives of your loved ones, we want to help you fight back.

If you're an atheist, you don't attend church. You avoid Christians as much as possible. So how is a church endagering your life?

In response to the overwhelming and heartening volume of requests for advice on how best to hold our elected officials accountable during this turbulent time, FFRF has created a set of resources for your use. FFRF’s website now has a page specifically dedicated to secular activism in the time of coronavirus. You can access it here: ffrf.org/legal/covid-resources.

So now the Atheists have something to do with their time while they sit at home. They can write more angry letters which will accomplish next to nothing, since MOST churches are following the stay at home orders!

FFRF has already sent a letter to every governor explaining why church exemptions are unconstitutional and lethal. We’ve also asked each FFRF member to call and email your own governor. That action alert has basic talking points. We’ve sent other letters of complaint, too. We’ve written op-eds. We will continue to challenge these inappropriate religious exemptions. And we know you want to fight them, too.

Actually, restricting one's right to worship is what is unconstitutional. The main reason organizations like FFRF get away with it is because they can judge shop for judicial activists who are willing to bend the Constitution to suit a liberal world view.

Please continue to report (ffrf.org/legal/report) any state/church violations happening in your community. While the Religious Right continues to exploit this global public health crisis as an opportunity to peddle their beliefs, we in the secular community must use all the resources at our disposal to ensure that reason-based solutions drive our public policy responses and solutions to this pandemic.

Nobody is exploiting anything. Nonetheless, the FFRF is behaving like an atheist Gestapo, reporting anybody that offends their sensitive feelings. No atheists are dying because a handful of people at tiny neighborhood church decided to congregate. Nonetheless, FFRF is giving marching orders to the unhappy few to restrict the freedom of the majority.

Thank you for your activism. We hope you are staying home and staying safe.

While the FFRF members hide at home, I'd like to mention that local churches are actively helping in whatever way they can during the pandemic. Churches are helping the needy get food, delivering medicine, providing home teaching aids and materials, and allowing their facilities to be used as temporary COVID testing centers. I have no knowledge of anybody at FFRF or American Atheists doing the same. In fact it's time, especially now, for atheists to put up or shut up, especially when they go the trouble of accenting their gripe with a demeaning picture of Jesus.

More Silliness From Richard Dawkins

2020-04-10T17:26:00.001-05:00

"I am agaianst religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world."

REALLY? Dr. Dawkins, have you never heard of Galileo, Isaac Newton, Michael Faraday, or Georges Lemaitre?

I am a habitual watcher of documentaries, especially those about nature and the Universe. I love learning about my world.

What astonishes me is how a brilliant person like Richard Dawkins can make such incredibly stupid assumptions.

That is what happens when bigotry trumps reason. I pity this poor man.

A Silly Twitter Post From Richard Dawkins

2020-04-05T12:40:00.000-05:00

From the Twitter feed of Atheism's leading spokesman, Richard Dawkins:

Richard Dawkins@RichardDawkins·Apr 4

Immune because “I’m covered in the blood of Jesus”

A church is an enclosed space where people right next to each other sing their lungs out into the air. A church is virus heaven: a focal point where people get infected, then go out & infect others

Perhaps the same could be said for Dr. Dawkins' lectures. After all, we're talking about 30 to 50 people OR MORE crammed into an enclosed space, elbow-to-elbow. Should we prohibit all college lecures during the yearly cold and flu season for the sake of public safety?

Nawwww... Dr. Dawkins is too important to let a flu bug interfere with his livelihood.

More Pretzel Logic From Atheists Alliance

2020-03-05T10:28:00.000-06:00

From a Post by AA President Bill Flavell (Flavell's comments are italicized):

I bet every atheist has heard Christians claiming that they used to be an atheist. When I hear that, I always ask them why they were an atheist and invariably discover that they were not really atheists at all—they were lazy Christians. Instead of praying/going to church they preferred drinking/sex/drugs/gambling or other self-indulgent pursuits.

So are we to assume no Christians began life as atheists? Ever?

Then I ask why they changed their minds and they always give me an emotional reason—they had an experience of some kind and discovered Jesus. What I never hear is “I found the ontological/cosmological/teleological argument…” [or whatever].

The Bible focuses on historical testimony, not teleological arguments. Christian belief is an act of faith. Not every Christian has a Philosophy degree and can quote Thomas Aquinas or Saint Augustine.

Well, in my opinion, if you were an atheist for no logical reason, you were a bad atheist and if you are now a Christian for no logical reason, you are a bad Christian.

So Atheists that grew up in non religious households are now bad atheists? All because they did what their parents did?

If logic takes you to atheism, you will almost certainly remain an atheist because no matter how much your life changes, logic will stubbornly stay the same. The beauty of logic is that it does not depend upon how you happen to feel today.

I guess this poor guy never heard of Anthony Flew? After more than 50 years of study, Mr. Flew, the most outspoken Atheist of his time, was led to a belief in Deism by LOGIC.

The idea that logic always leads you to Atheism is simply a silly assumption that Atheists the world over have coddled themselves with for centuries. If you want to see what logic can do, watch the debates between Richard Dawkins and John Lennox. Dr. Lennox uses logic to tear down every premise by dawkins, and he does it in a calm and collected manner.

This is the reason Dawkins won't debate any more Theists. They're just too logical.

40,000 sects or more Atheist Hyperbole?

2020-03-02T12:11:00.002-06:00

Atheists are fond of claiming that Christianity is confusing and hosts up to 40,000 sects or denominations. They follow up with this question: Which sect is right and how can we trust any of them?

Atheists are no less prone than anyone else to accept something they read over the internet as truth without checking out the validity of the claim. Here is a link that explains the source of the "40,000 Sects" and how that survey inflates the actual of number of denominations:

https://thebensmartblog.com/2014/02/12/40000-denominations-worldwide-christianity-divided/

Here is a link to an actual breakdown of true denominations:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_denominations

Although there are still quite a few denominations, most of them withing the groups are almost indetical in their beliefs and doctrine. Village Atheism wants you to think they're all entirely different and settling on one is an exercise in futility.

The real exercise in futility is trying to speak common sense to a Village Atheist.

More Biblical Struggling By A Village Atheist

2020-02-16T09:09:00.002-06:00

Village Atheists are known for cherry picking, as the following example shows:

Bible says Moses was lying. Ever consider that? < Arkangel_Michael > 2020-02-16 02:57

Moses claimed spirit of God wrote in stone tablets, spoke to him via a burning bush.
2 Corinthians 3:3 says spirit of God doesn't write ink or stone tablets.. only flesh tablets.

WRONG: The Atheist is making an assumption. Nowhere does the verse claim that God doesn't write on stone tablets. The verse is simply a comparison in support of the New Covenant in Christ.

1 John 4:12 says no man has ever heard or seen god at any time.

Misused and misinterpreted verse. The verse also doesn't mention hearing. Moses never beheld God's face. In fact, Moses covered his head when he went into the Holy of Holies, because no one can look at God's face and live.

Did Moses give you some bread?

John 6:32 says the bread that Moses gave you was NOT from heaven.

WRONG. The verse is being used out of context. Verse 32 is in reference verse 31, which refers to manna as a gift from the Father.

Matthew 16:12 says doctrine is bread... Moses did give you some doctrine

Matthew 16:12 doesn't refer to manna.

Is you understood the Hebrew word "Satan" means "Adversary" or "Accuser" in English..

John 5:45 "there is one that accuses you to father, Moses"

Quoted out of context, especially since the Atheist didn't post the entire verse. It doesn't refer to Satan.

Jude 1:9 "Michael dared not accuse Satan"

By accusing Satan, I would be a Satan.. DUH

This is pure pretzel logic. The verse in Jude refers to judgement, aka REBUKE, not accusation.

I know you're confused because red pajamas
not my problem you preferred to get your info from Bug's Bunny instead of the source/book

Maybe Bugs Bunny is Arkangel Michael's bible teacher. That would explain his silly argument.

Word Salad From American Atheists: What Is Atheism?

2020-02-14T18:17:00.000-06:00

From the American Atheists website:

https://www.atheists.org/activism/resources/about-atheism/

So, according to American Atheists, what is Atheism?

"To be clear: Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods."

It seems like a distinction without a difference. If you were to ask any Atheist if they believe in the supernatural, he or she will express their DISBELIEF.

"Lack of belief" implies ignorance. Are American Atheists claiming they are ignorant? That would lean more towards Agnosticism, which claims God is unknown or can't be known. This can't be the case with American Atheists, who flat out deny the existence of gods.

If a Christian witnesses about Jesus to an Atheist, and the Atheist doesn't find the testimony compelling, that Atheist has made a concious decision not to believe, period.

The blog post starts out with this premise:

"Atheism is not an affirmative belief that there is no god nor does it answer any other question about what a person believes."

Later, the writer of the post claims:

"Agnostic isn’t just a “weaker” version of being an atheist. It answers a different question. Atheism is about what you believe. Agnosticism is about what you know."

NOW Atheism is about belief. Hmmmm....

American Atheists is one of the largest Atheism advocacy organizations in the US, yet their site is chock full of pseudo scholarship and intellectual dishonesty.

"Being an atheist doesn’t mean you’re sure about every theological question, have answers to the way the world was created, or how evolution works. It just means that the assertion that gods exist has left you unconvinced."

Once again, that is disbelief, not a lack of it. That is a concious decision.

"Wishing that there was an afterlife, or a creator god, or a specific god doesn’t mean you’re not an atheist. Being an atheist is about what you believe and don’t believe, not about what you wish to be true or would find comforting."

Once again, it's not a belief system but its about what you believe?

It's time somebody at American Atheists read a book or two on Philosophy or Logic.

Village Atheist claims "no morals"

2020-02-11T09:09:00.000-06:00

An atheist posted this in a Craigslist forum:

Religion = Autistic delusion < granpa > 2020-02-11 06:35

There is no such thing as moral or immoral behavior (and therefore no such thing as sin). There is only civilized and uncivilized behavior.

Civilized behavior is behavior that respects civilized laws, rules, and expectations. Civilized laws are laws that do not give any one person or any one group of people any special rights above what all others have. The more a society treats everyone as equals the more civilized it is. (Equal rights. Equal protection. Equal pay for equal work. Equal punishment for equal crimes.)

Wrong. A society's laws are also reflective of its morals. On top of that, "civilized behavior" is purely subjective. For example some cultures believe it's more civilized to eat with forks and spoons vs eating with your hands. Look at the various degress of murder a person can be found guilty of. Those aren't practical applications but moral ones.

Religion is how autistic people (strictly speaking hyper-empirical people) see civilization. They see all authority figures as priests.

Nope, I don't see Donald Trump or my local cops as priests. Nice try.

Fascists paradoxically promote violence and war as actions that create positive transformation in society.

So are Liberal Democratic activists also Fascists? Look at how they harrass innocent bystanders all in the name of social change.

It is well known that Fascists occupy the far right of the political spectrum. But, as bizarre as it seems, Fascist bigots see themselves as liberals. They see themselves as innocent victims fighting against an oppressive establishment of pedophile priests that are trying to take away their freedom.

https://forums.craigslist.org/?ID=304176055

This poor guy's post is all over the map. What started as an argument against moral behavior turned into a political rant against conservative Republicans. And none of it makes his point.

Next time, try staying on topic, buddy.

Atheists just refuse to "get it"

2020-02-09T17:17:00.000-06:00

Posted in the Craigslist Religion Forum:

Reading the Bible vs Studying the Bible..... < slots-and-guitars > 2020-02-09 11:38

Why aren't people allowed to simply read the Bible like any other book? It seems that is the purpose it was written for.

Who says people aren't allowed to read the Bible as literature? What stops one from doing so?

Well, here are two reasons :
1. Religious leaders want to control people by telling the followers what the Bible "Really" means. They claim to have special "Spiritual Knowledge" and special "Relationship with God (s)".

This guy is descibing a cult. I would never attend a church that doesn't encouarge me to study the Scriptures on my own, as the Bereans did, checking up on the preacher's theology. Only groups like the Jehovah's Witnesses demand that their interpretation is infallible and unquestionable.

2. I you simply read the Bible like any other book, you see that it is full of mythology, superstition, outdated science, fables, legends, lies, poetry, and overall is not well written, informative or entertaining.

This is just the kind of bigoted comment I've come to expect from Village Atheists, and yet they claim to be the open minded ones. Brights don't even read the Bible. They depend on other Atheists on the internet for their understanding of its contents.

Read the Bible like you would Darwin's Origin of Species, And Bible based religions like Catholicism, Islam, JWs, Judaism would lose all their power and authority.

https://forums.craigslist.org/?ID=304140449

In comparing The Bible to Darwin is this guy suggesting that Origin of the Species is filled with lies, outdated science, and fables? That it's not even well written or informative?

The best advice I can give Village Atheists is to try thinking before they make fools of themselves online.

'Nuff said

A Crash Course in Jehovah's Witness Atheism

2020-02-01T10:21:00.000-06:00

This post on the Atheist Alliance International website claims to teach you how to debate religion in just a 900 word essay.

You can read the article here:

https://www.atheistalliance.org/thinking-out-loud/debating-believers-a-masterclass-in-under-900-words/

I'll focus on the main points of this "master class" in philosophy:

"After thousands of years, no one has developed a successful argument for the existence of ANY god, despite many smart people trying hard to do so."

This is purely a prejudiced opinion. Billions of religious believers across the planet prove this opinion is dead wrong.

"The second thing to remember is the believer is the one with a belief—you are simply wondering why they have the belief."

WRONG. Since the Atheist cannot prove the non-existence of the supernatural, Atheism is based on the BELIEF that gods don't exist. Hiding behind the "Atheism is the default position" argument doesn't change this. Atheists cannot accept the fact that they live in a faith-based reality.

"The believer has the burden of proof—hold them to it. And avoid saying anything that will transfer the burden to you."

You mean, like telling the Believer he or she is wrong and that gods don't exist? That burden always exists for the Atheist, because Atheism is based on a truth claim. This argument from Atheism is just sophistry.

"Avoiding the burden of proof is not cowardice—it’s efficiency."

Unless its the believer avoiding the burden of proof, which is why Atheists avoid taking on that burden in nearly all their arguments.

Further along, the author wrote this:

"Seeking to agree to disagree

Have none of it. In this type of discussion, one person is right and one is wrong. You will have wasted your time if you don’t pin down who is right and who is wrong. Persevere until it’s blindingly obvious."

In other words, until it's "blindingly obvious" that the Atheist is right. This is not a discussion, this is simply a totalitarian attempt to shove the non-believer's opinions down the Believer's throat and then walk away with some mock victory. The Atheist's premise from the beginning is that the Believer is wrong and there is no proof required from the Atheist to support this.

The Author of the post, Bill Flavell, makes some decent points about arguing, but Tip #8 is kind of funny:

"Learn when not to argue. Some people are so delusional or so lacking in their understanding of logic that a coherent discussion is impossible. When you encounter such people it’s best to find another way to spend your evening—make an excuse and leave."

Mr Flavell's logic hasn't impressed me much so far. His article makes several mistakes that anybody with a basic understanding in Philosophy wouldn't have made.

"It takes calmness, patience, and persistence to knock down believer’s arguments. I think if you use these tips you’ll enjoy your discussions more and you are more likely to find onlookers benefit from them, even if your opponents just retire to religious websites to lick their wounds and see if they can do better next time."

Aye, there's the rub! The real intention is to assume a position of superiority and humiliate an opponent using Mr. Flavell's tips. However, he forgot one very important suggestion:

The Atheist must be sure to limit debates to laymen or new believers. Don't attempt to debate with a pastor, seminary student, or philosophy major. These people are prepared to defend their beliefs in a scholarly fashion, and a poorly equipped Atheist will be the one walking off, licking wounds and sputtering obscenities. The Atheist must pick their fights with only the low hanging fruit.

A great example of this are the debates betweeen John Lennox and Richard Dawkins. Dawkins was clearly in over his head and Lennox proved it.

Flavell made one point I agree with:

"The problem is we have to learn how to reason with religious people and few of us know how to do it." This includes Bill Flavell.

Finally, I'd like to point out that although Bill Flavell states that religious people aren't stupid, his article and the condescension it contains really say the opposite. Perhaps Bill Flavell should better prepare himself for debating before advising others.

'Nuff said.

Logic Demands a Creator

2019-09-08T18:43:00.000-05:00

Ok, so it's been a long time, and a lot of events have happened in my personal life, but I'm back and as feisty as ever.

Let's start with an argument I heard from the late pastor, philosopher and apologist R.C. Sproul:

Logic demands a Creator. I'll add that atheism is in fact logically indefensible if you stick to the rules of logic.

"What do you mean?" an Atheist might ask. "How can you prove a god exists without empirical evidence?"

The fact is, emprical evidence isn't necessary. I'll touch upon that argument in another post, but let it suffice to say that something can exist while leaving no trace of its existence. You can still logically defend the existence of God without a trace of physical evidence.

Let's discuss "being". To be, or exist, there are only 4 possibilities:

1. You are imaginary.

2. You are self-created

3. You are self-existent

4. You are an effect with a prior cause.

That list is easily pared down. Basically Number 4 is the best provable reason for all of our existence.

Now let's go back to the beginning of everything.

A long time ago, our Universe began as an infintely hot and dense spot, somewhere in the cosmos. We don't really know what that spot was made of or where it came from, but we do know that from nothing, nothing comes.

If Nothing were eternal, then we wouldn't have a chance for existence. Space, time and matter are created things which didn't exist for us before the Big Bang.

So let's look again at the 4 criteria of existence. Once again, the only proper explanation that properly accounts for the existence of our Universe is Number 4.

Right now, we have no way of knowing for certain where the Singularity came from or how it was made, but it was made. Everything we can perceive is an effect that had a prior cause. To be an effect there must be a cause. Causes, however, cannot recede into infinity. There must ultimately be a cause without a prior effect. Now we look to Number 3.

The First Cause, or what some call the Prime Mover, must be intelligent and powerful. After all, the creation of the cosmos, which is something that came from somewhere, would require a level of power we humans could barely imagine. God fits the bill here.

An imaginary being can't create anything. God can't create Himself, that's a contradiction. God can't be the Beginner of all Things if He is, in fact, an effect with a prior cause.

Therefore, God is self-existent, and having no beginning and no end, infinite and eternal. We call Him God because He has the ability create the Universe, which is our home.

I believe God exists. Physics and Logic demand His existence. Otherwise I wouldn't be here posting this blog.

Next: The Empirical Evidence Argument and why Atheists shouldn't rely on it.

'Nuff said.