14 Dec 10
1 edit
Originally posted by John W BoothWant to see Atheists pontificate ?
I wonder about that too. If he is, then it is one of the best parodies of christian pontification I have come across.
Watch what they write in response to Former Atheist Anthony Flew deciding to follow the evidence where ever it may lead. And in this case that there is a God afterall.
Watch the pontifications from atheists in response.
&feature=related
14 Dec 10
Originally posted by jaywillWhy is one atheist converting to christianity proof? If I put up a video of a christian who converted to be an atheist or even a jew or muslim would that prove christianity is wrong?
Want to see Atheists pontificate ?
Watch what they write in response to Former Atheist Anthony Flew deciding to follow the evidence where ever it may lead. And in this case that there is a God afterall.
Watch the pontifications from atheists in response.
[b] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJrVR4zyusU&feature=related [/b]
14 Dec 10
3 edits
Originally posted by PsychoPawn======================================
Why is one atheist converting to christianity proof? If I put up a video of a christian who converted to be an atheist or even a jew or muslim would that prove christianity is wrong?
Why is one atheist converting to christianity proof? If I put up a video of a christian who converted to be an atheist or even a jew or muslim would that prove christianity is wrong?
===========================================
Anthony Flew converted to Christianity ???
That's news to me. I didn't hear anything about Anthony Flew converting to Christianity.
Educate yourself first on the matter and come back with more accurate observation. I just heard he changed from Atheism to believing that there is a God. That's all.
14 Dec 10
Originally posted by jaywillThanks for the condescending reply... it's completely in character for you.
[b]======================================
Why is one atheist converting to christianity proof? If I put up a video of a christian who converted to be an atheist or even a jew or muslim would that prove christianity is wrong?
===========================================
Anthony Flew converted to Christianity ???
Thats news to me. I di ...[text shortened]... bservation. I just heard he changed from Atheism to believing that there is a God. That's all.[/b]
Even if you simply state that it is someone changing from atheism to believing there is a god - that is not proof, it is an anecdote and it doesn't prove there is a god.
Even if it wasn't christianity, my point still stands and is obvious. It's a shame you were too anxious to be condescending to actually take the time to think about the obvious point I was actually trying to get across.
15 Dec 10
1 edit
Originally posted by jaywillvishvahetu isn't offering a parody of atheists. He's parodying the likes of you. His long posts of supposedly "scholarly" analysis and hugely specific and detailed assertions based on sheer speculation (and the self-fullfilling literature that goes with it) seem to me to be a parody of your long posts of supposedly "scholarly" analysis and assertions based on literature, itself the product of centuries of metaphysical speculation. If divegeester is right - and I think he may be - then vishvahetu is a fairly clever satirist.
Want to see Atheists pontificate ?
15 Dec 10
2 edits
Originally posted by John W BoothIf vishvahetu really is satirising other fundamentalists (not theists in general) then I applaud his delivery, diligence to the cause of applying specious and faulty reasoning, and (as can be applied to many, though perhaps not all) suggestion of low scientific education and knowledge. I doubt this is true, but if I'm wrong I would warmly welcome a discrete message letting me know this is the case; moreover I'd be happy to keep his secret (and to this end I would act in no way so to undermine/unmask his efforts) 😵
vishvahetu isn't offering a parody of atheists. He's parodying the likes of you. His long posts of supposedly "scholarly" analysis and hugely specific and detailed assertions based on sheer speculation (and the self-fullfilling literature that goes with it) seem to me to be a parody of your long posts of supposedly "scholarly" analysis and assertions b ...[text shortened]... ivegeester is right - and I think he may be - then vishvahetu is a fairly clever satirist.
15 Dec 10
Originally posted by PsychoPawnMaybe he's a bit upset to realise that vishvahetu, perhaps consciously or perhaps inadvertently, has been effectively parodying him in several posters' eyes.
Thanks [jaywill] for the condescending reply... it's completely in character for you.
15 Dec 10
Originally posted by PsychoPawnI get your point. But then again I didn't say "Hey, here's proof of the existence of God evrybody. Anthony Flew moves from a Atheism to Theism."
Thanks for the condescending reply... it's completely in character for you.
Even if you simply state that it is someone changing from atheism to believing there is a god - that is not proof, it is an anecdote and it doesn't prove there is a god.
Even if it wasn't christianity, my point still stands and is obvious. It's a shame you were too anxious ...[text shortened]... actually take the time to think about the obvious point I was actually trying to get across.
And just like you have every right to submit someone moving in the opposite direction so I can hold Flew as an example of deciding the evidence has persuaded him to change his mind.
That's fair.
Sorry to sound condescending on you chap.
15 Dec 10
Originally posted by jaywillSo if I am to get this right, Anthony flew the coop.....
I get your point. But then again I didn't say "Hey, here's proof of the existence of God evrybody. Anthony Flew moves from a Atheism to Theism."
And just like you have every right to submit someone moving in the opposite direction so I can hold Flew as an example of deciding the evidence has persuaded him to change his mind.
That's fair.
Sorry to sound condescending on you chap.
15 Dec 10
2 edits
Originally posted by sonhouseConcerning the assumption that there is no intelligent design evidenced in the natural world, he flew the atheistic coop.
So if I am to get this right, Anthony flew the coop.....
Now the poster had a point. "So what? I can match that with this religious guy who moved in the opposite way - from theism to atheism"
I think that most of the mind you examine moving from theism to atheism do so because of this kind of attitude:
"Well, If there is an intelligent God, I DON'T LIKE the way this God set things up. And because I don't agree that this or that is the best way things could have been designed, therefore I adopt a position that there is no God afterall."
I could be mistaken. But what I think I hear from people like Hitchens is "Pretty LOUSY design if you ask me. I could have done better."
To them I would say " Well, a design that you do not like or agree with, is STILL a design. You or me not LIKING the design does not make it NOT a design. It just makes it one which you disapprove of."
A design disapproved of is still a design. Do you see my point ?
15 Dec 10
Originally posted by jaywill
Concerning the assumption that there is no intelligent design evidenced in the natural world, he flew the atheistic coop.
Now the poster had a point. "So what? I can match that with this religious guy who moved in the opposite way - from theism to atheism"
I think that most of the mind you examine moving from theism to atheism do so because of ...[text shortened]... disapprove of."
A design disapproved of is still a design. Do you see my point ?
"Well, If there is an intelligent God, I DON'T LIKE the way this God set things up. And because I don't agree that this or that is the best way things could have been designed, therefore I adopt a position that there is no God afterall."
That's not it at all. It's that I don't see the evidence for a god - that's why I don't believe there is a god. I think that's really why most atheists don't believe in god.
The issue about supposed design is that if god is so perfect then why isn't his design perfect? That question is usually answered by suggesting that we are not smart enough to be able to critique the design so we just don't realize how great it is.
Hitchens simply suggests that he can find flaws in the supposed design so how can it be so divinely inspired? I would guess that when you ask him he would simply suggest that he doesn't actually believe that it is designed at all.
The only real evidence I have seen of a design proposed is simply incredulity or in other words - I can't think of a way that I would accept other than a design so it must be a design. That's not evidence, it's incredulity.
How do you concretely define whether something has been designed?
15 Dec 10
Originally posted by jaywill"Well, If there is an intelligent God, I DON'T LIKE the way this God set things up. And because I don't agree that this or that is the best way things could have been designed, therefore I adopt a position that there is no God afterall."
Concerning the assumption that there is no intelligent design evidenced in the natural world, he flew the atheistic coop.
Now the poster had a point. "So what? I can match that with this religious guy who moved in the opposite way - from theism to atheism"
I think that most of the mind you examine moving from theism to atheism do so because of ...[text shortened]... disapprove of."
A design disapproved of is still a design. Do you see my point ?
In response to this, I could say:
"I don't like the idea that death is the end and there is nothing. I feel more comfortable that we have the opportunity to carry on and spend eternity in bliss, so I therefore believe in God and in heaven."
I wouldn't agree that all theists think like this though. There could be a large number of reasons why someone is a theist.
15 Dec 10
2 edits
Originally posted by lausey=========================================
"Well, If there is an intelligent God, I DON'T LIKE the way this God set things up. And because I don't agree that this or that is the best way things could have been designed, therefore I adopt a position that there is no God afterall."
In response to this, I could say:
"I don't like the idea that death is the end and there is nothing. I feel m hink like this though. There could be a large number of reasons why someone is a theist.
In response to this, I could say:
"I don't like the idea that death is the end and there is nothing. I feel more comfortable that we have the opportunity to carry on and spend eternity in bliss, so I therefore believe in God and in heaven."
============================================
Okay. You are saying "Aren't you just believing according to wishful thinking yourself ? "
Well, resurrection from the grip of death is something Jesus demonstrated. It was an intrinsic component of His message. It was even the major focal point. It was hardly my wishful thinking.
At best you could say it was the wishful thinking of Jesus. The only problem is that He not only wished it, He apparently demonstrated victory over death. "I am the resurrection and the life ..." (John 11:25)
Okay, Alright. That is my belief in the document of the New Testament. I hardly wished it into the text though. It was delivered to me as is by Christ and the apostles. Whether I wished it or not it came TO me in that manner.
A second point. I do not expect, according to my study of the Bible, to go as is away to some happy place forever. I do not see God taking His forgiven sinners away to a happy place - heaven forever, as is.
Rather I see God saying something like this:
"You get to be forgiven of all sins which you ever committed. They are judged on Calvary. Forever, you will not have to pay for them.
But you DO NOT get to remain the same kind of person you were. You have to be conformed to the image of My Son Jesus Christ. You and I are not compatible. And I don't change. So you have to be changed. And through My Spirit I will transform you to become like Jesus Christ so that we may be together forever. "
This is different from the sinner being whisked away as is, to a blissful happy place. This is transformation into God in life and nature, but not in His Godhead. This is making Christ "the Firstborn among many brothers".
Now you may say this is wishful thinking. However, all this transformation into the image of Christ is beyond what I could ever imagine, let alone hope for. This is a salvation beyond all that I could ask or think.
So I think that God's full salvation in the Bible is beyond what the human imagination could have conceived.
"But as it is written, things which eye has not seen and ear has not heard and which have not come up in man's heart; things which God has prepared for those who love Him." (1 Cor. 2:9)
And again:
"But to Him who is able to do superabundantly above all that we ask or think, according to the power which operates in us, to Him be glory in the church and in Christ Jesus unto all generations ..." (Eph. 3:20,21)
God's eternal plan is above all that man could ask or think. It could hardly be all wishful thinking imposed by our imagination onto the God of the Bible.