Posted on 09/23/2017 8:21:17 AM PDT by Raymond Pamintuan
Atheism, the rejection of the possibility that “God” exists, has become the dominant thought amongst intellectuals in the past century and has been around longer than most people think. For over 2000 years, it was based on philosophical arguments that can roughly be summed up as the atheist saying, “I don’t know how ‘X’ came to be, but you can’t prove it came from God.” This mindset has been highly effective because it places the burden of proof on the theist to prove the positive of God’s existence, which, superficially, is impossible to do – because no evidence exists that provides “proof” that can be independently verified and repeated at a five-sigma (5σ) confidence level and above that God is real.
During the Age of Enlightenment in the 18th century, atheists were no longer content to use philosophical arguments and started using positive claims that basically said, “‘X’ proves God does not exist.”
Most recently, the highly influential New Atheism spearheaded by Dawkins, Harris, Dennett, and Hitchens has modified the positive arguments, but reinforced and justified a dangerous trend that started in the late 20th century that roughly states, “Because you do not accept that “X” proves God does not exist, you are not credible and must not be allowed to be in a position of influence over others.”
The New Atheism mindset has had an enormous effect among atheists in positions of power in academia: For the “thought crime” of believing God exists, theist scientists have actually been blocked from jobs and tenure, they have been prevented from getting their works funded or published, and many have actually been terminated from their jobs. One now sees university campuses where openly theist professors are becoming rarer by the year,
(Excerpt) Read more at pjmedia.com ...
Atheists bow before then smallest god - themselves.
It depends- is the atheist truly willing to set aside personal subjective opinion and look critically at the issues in an intellectual manner? Are you willing to do the same? Are you both willing to take a look at your side’s most vulnerable positions? Will the atheist be willing to take hte opposite side and try to refute his own position with critical thinking? Or are they locked into non critical pat answer atheism?
Christians have had to defend their position against a whole slew of objections (ie: Bible is just a book written by fallible men- prone to myriad errors, The bible is full of contradicitons- Creation didn’t happen in 6 literal days, There is no official records of Christ dying on the cross- the miracles spoken of were nothing but mass hallucinations/hysteria- If God can create a rock to big to pick up, then He’s not all powerful- No physical evidence for God- Etc etc etc), But atheists haven’t had to really defend against a slew of objections to their beliefs-
Can you both set your own personal beliefs aside and look critically at evidences? Remembering that psychological certainty and confidence do not necessarily = truth, but rather just opinion?
Most people on both sides can not do this- pride and prejudiced too often mar the conversation, and the conversations almost always devolve into finger pointing and accusations-
A good honest discussion would involve either side to pose an answer, AND also an honest counter argument to that answer (ie ‘playing devil’s advocate’) - this helps develop a deep honest critical thinking conversation
Your goal- BOTH sides, —SHOULD BE—, to weed through subjective certainties, and get to the truth, or at the very least, critically question WHY you have come to believe what you believe- whether it is the actual objective truth or not
Ultimately- both sides should approach the conversation knowing that their opinions are just assumptions- based partly on evidence, and partly on personal subjective opinion. The goal —SHOULD BE— to find out which side/opinion has the the stronger set of objective truth attached to it- Too often BOTH sides present their opinion in an adamant angry exclamation as though the opinion were absolute truth- Learning to recognize when subjective opinion is present, will go a long way towards keeping a conversation civil- assumptions are not facts- They —CAN BE— based on facts, but often they are are only partially based on facts- don’t present them though they are absolute truths- recognize that a large part of our conversations are based on subjective opinion and assumptions
Arrogant elitism and ‘holier than thou’ attitudes on BOTH sides is a discussion killer- period- evaluate your opponent, and if they express these attitudes- politely ask to keep the discussion objective and civil- Sadly though- folks on both sides often are too steeped in their own pride to take a critical look at issues they disagree with
The object of the discussion should be to take a critical deep thinking look at the issues- NOT to engage in a pissing contest
Can you accept that they will very likely not aCCept anything you say? Not many people can- most folks feel a need to convince the other side of their point- This often leads to a rapid break down of the discussion. We forget that the opposition has sensations and experiences that they have lived that have led them to their decisions- sensations and experiences that have shaped their subjective beliefs- just as we have-
Too often when ‘discussing’ such issues- the swords come out immediately- Rather than asking the opponent to examine both sides of the issue so that we can take a good objective look at why we have come to our subjective conclusions- we parry and thrust- trying to knock our opponent off balance- It seems we take immediate offense when someone doesn’t agree with us as it hurts our pride- and too often go on the offense- it’s very hard to have a neutral, civil meeting of the minds. We Christians have a tendency to take immediate offense to the opinion of atheists that God is a myth- and feel we must ‘battle for God’
“How to Debate an Atheist”
We probably shouldn’t UNLESS we can learn to do so tenderly, carefully, and are willing to learn the high art of critical thinking, and UNLESS we run across HONEST atheist who is genuinely interested in civilly discussing their position, and who isn’t just out to criticism, ridicule and malign Christians- God tells us to ‘shake the dust from our sandals’ (IE have nothing to do with those who refuse to listen honestly)
We must learn humility, and learn to consider our discussion opponent’s side, and learn to honestly evaluate BOTH sides of the issue
It doesn't work that way. You can't prove a negative. And I don't agree with PJ's summary of the atheist world view. It's better summed up as "I see no reason to assume there might be a God, so I don't."
To deny any evidence a supreme creator exists is as ignorant a position as one could take. Saying that, considering the evidence, pro and con, I've concluded that God doesn't exist, at least makes an atheist seem capable of reasonable thought. Very few take that stance, however.
The following is a long read- but well worth it- He takles the very tough quesiton about Why a "Loving God" would allow intense personal suffering:
…………………………………………………………………..
Before we begin analyzing the first three of these statements, let me make a methodological observation or two about the fourth one--the actual 'meat' of the issue.
Methodological Observation One:
The first observation is that we normally overstep the limits of the evidence when we think about this problem. By this I mean that we make conclusions, assumptions, or even 'doubts' beyond what the evidence or situation allows us to legitimately make. Consider how the emotional impact of this problem works:
The 'rub' of this argument can be simply stated: we cannot imagine a 'reason or motive' that would be 'big enough' to justify making the trade-off decision that God made to continue with The Plan (assuming that The Plan included the alleged items 1 through 3). And, since we cannot imagine a 'reason or motive' adequate for this, somehow many take a "next step" anyway and :
http://christianthinktank.com/gr5part1.html
This fella Glen Miller has one of the best critical thinking Minds I've ever coem across- how he breaks down questions, objections, accusations etc is really something special- He gets to the meat of their objections, and presents answers in ways that many, myself included- could never in a million years accomplish. His site is well worth bookmarking- I've gone to it over and over, over the years for help with difficult questions and objections by atheists and by folks just looking for answers-
The problem with all these evidences for God is that too many Christians behave as if once they have presented one or more, the Christian God is proved. but that is not the case. these proofs only prove or are evidence of an Intelligent Designer. If an atheist were to be convinced by this type of argument, it would still be necessary to explain how we get from, “Someone created all this,” to Christianity.
every active atheist (those trying to recruit) I have met over the years have one thing in common. a deep anger at there core. if you spend any time debating them on the issue you find out that a lot of there belief is a faith into itself. I have a lot nore respect for the agnostic because at least they no that they have no way of knowing and that for those that believe and disbelieve it is a mater of faith.
Take away from this thread:
Pray for the lost. Only Jesus saves.
Remind them that atheism is as much a faith as any other worldview.
You will never see an immediate effect from debating the lost, but never underestimate the power of God’s grace.
[[It’s better summed up as “I see no reason to assume there might be a God, so I don’t.”]]
That is basically the premise of their disbelief- with the added: “There is so much cruelty in this world, I find it impossible to believe a Loving God could have created it”
Some atheists don’t go that far in their thinking about why they are atheists- they don’t believe for more selfish reasons, but many atheists truly do have a problem with the issue of suffering in a world created by a supposedly loving God- and this objection is a HONEST, SELFLESS objection
It’s a combination of wanting others to believe the truth and wanting to assert yourself over another.
The first desire is good in itself, the second evil. Human nature seems universally to incline, as told in some teachings, toward the second.
[[every active atheist (those trying to recruit) I have met over the years have one thing in common. a deep anger at there core.]]
The objective in such cases should be to get to the bottom of the deep hatred (IF they are willing to openly discuss)- very often there is a reason- that the atheist themselves, keep hidden underneath basic atheistic talking points-
Some atheists however, just don’t want to discuss anything- or worse- just want to berate, insult, and malign anyone who isn’t also an atheist- these folks aren’t willing to discover or admit why they are angry- they are content just being angry, morally superior, and unfortunately. These are the folks God says to walk away from- their hearts are so hardened that nothing you say will ever get through to them- and they will just be adding fuel their hatred by ‘debating’ you- they are actively looking for reasons to continue being offended by the presence of Christians
It all begins with believed premise. Theists start with positive belief and then debate, while atheists start with negative belief prior to discussing it.
This is what makes it so hard.
Agreed.
Don’t debate atheists, rather, pray for them and show them God working in you.
Nobody debated me into believing. God did that Himself.
Atheists will claim victory the very first time you hesitate to word am answer or say a wrong syllable.
It's really hard to get across to most people. They assume I have a belief system, it's just different than theirs, and if they can get me on the defense, trying to explain and justify it, then they think they are on the road to winning the debate. It's very difficult for them to absorb the notion that I don't have a belief system and there's nothing to defend.
Hopefully, the atheist will be able to identify his own view of absolute truth but Satan has been busy keeping the search for knowledge and truth OUT of the education system.
10 yrs ago I learned about post-modernism, totally wack, and today I just learned that there is a new (for me) philosophy called “Critical Realism.” Very good article about Satan’s lies and how Christians can in fact relate the truth.
Introduction to Postmodern Philosophy
http://www.postmodernpreaching.net/postmodern-philosophy.html
I actually can’t believe I understand this stuff. LOL Enjoy and have a blessed day!
Happy to see you again.
My dear fellow poster, you’re telling me you believe that you don’t believe anything.
Those who choose not to believe in something always fall for anything else. Your decision to not believe in something w/o evidence does not change the facts.
Unless you are so well educated and experienced in all things and subjects, you do actually exercise great amounts of faith; but in your self-justified position of “I don’t “know” therefore I won’t believe” leaves you in a position of ignorance in spite of your declarations.
Best regards for your journey in “proving” everything you encounter- you must be really smart and astute to know everything before you accept anything....
Thanks Huldah- I’ll have a look at that tonight IF the rapture doesn’t happen today lol :) It sounds interesting- I’ve run across ‘critical thinkers’ on youtube- they are a particularly nasty group of people- the ones I’ve seen anyways- They definitely have a problem with arrogance and have a superiority complex- as they think that anyone that doesn’t believe what they believe is stupid and incapable of ‘critical thinking’ (and of course by ‘critical thinking’ they of course mean’ atheistic non belief’)- What they espouse is Not critical thinking, but just the same old same old subjective Godless partisan opinion- They tout it as new- but it’s the same old Godless partisan ideology that has been around forever-
Even Mother Teresa had times of doubt. If faith in God were easy, the world would be a different place.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.