The Theist's Guide to Converting Atheists

[InterestedAtheist]

If there are in fact multiple dimensions/universes, you might find some of that stuff spread over them, providing there are an infinite number of alternatives and the same basic rules of human reality don't apply in at least some of them.

Okay. And if the streets were made of custard, we'd all have to wear gumboots to work.

 

[cloudyday2]

Can you present evidence of His existence?

Imagine that there is something like Project Blue Book to investigate claims of miracles rather than UFOs. So when somebody claims a miracle from God the FBI might interview witnesses, gather physical specimens, and finally write a report for the files. Let's say a few of the claims cannot be explained - even by the swamp gas hypothesis. Would that make you curious about the possibility that God exists?

 

[InterestedAtheist]

Imagine that there is something like Project Blue Book to investigate claims of miracles rather than UFOs. So when somebody claims a miracle from God the FBI might interview witnesses, gather physical specimens, and finally write a report for the files. Let's say a few of the claims cannot be explained - even by the swamp gas hypothesis. Would that make you curious about the possibility that God exists?

The amazing thing is that this isn't happening already, that Christians themselves aren't taking the steps themselves to find the truth so they can trumpet it all over the world. But of course Christians already know the truth - that miracles work so much better when they're stories you read about from decades of centuries ago, or that you hear of from a friend of a friend. Best not too dig too deeply, in case it turns out there's nothing there to find.

 

[Tom 1]

The amazing thing is that this isn't happening already, that Christians themselves aren't taking the steps themselves to find the truth so they can trumpet it all over the world. But if course Christians already know the truth - that miracles work so much better when they're stories you read about from decades of centuries ago, or that you hear of from a friend of a friend. Best not too dig too deeply, in case it turns out there's nothing there to find.

With these threads you are simply rehashing ideas that weren’t new millennia ago. The bible is a far more sophisticated text that people generally credit it to be - it juxtaposes these kind of basic materialist notions with other realities of consciousness, experience and knowing. That there is a split between them is nothing new; the materialist constructs a way of thinking that is coherent and consistent within itself, and comes to believe that this has some externally objective validity in some overarching sense, and hence demands that everything should align with this way of thinking, and that anything outside of it must be rejected. You can’t convince someone who believes only in square boxes by showing them a round one, they’ll only insist that you make it square so that they can ‘see’ it.

 

[InterestedAtheist]

On well, then. I did say the things which would convince me of God's existence; the things which you would expect to be readily available if God were real. But it seems Christians don't possess these proofs.

 

[Tom 1]

the things which you would expect to be readily available if God were real.

The things you would expect if your idea of who god is bore some relation to the question.

 

[Tom 1]

Okay. And if the streets were made of custard, we'd all have to wear gumboots to work.

The point being that underlying your questions is the mistaken notion that ‘proof’ of god would somehow involve something that would arise out of your own way of thinking to challenge it.

 

[InterestedAtheist]

The point being that underlying your questions is the mistaken notion that ‘proof’ of god would somehow involve something that would arise out of your own way of thinking to challenge it.

Not at all. But I get that you have to say this. Since you lack anything you back up your own beliefs, you have to pretend that it's the fault of other people, for not thinking like you.

 

[InterestedAtheist]

The things you would expect if your idea of who god is bore some relation to the question.

Oh, I'm sorry. Is God not a three-in-one entity, an immortal, immaterial, omnipotent entity who created heaven and earth? Am I thinking of someone else?

 

[Tom 1]

Not at all. But I get that you have to say this. Since you lack anything you back up your own beliefs, you have to pretend that it's the fault of other people, for not thinking like you.

Spoken like a true believer! The definition of blind faith - believing things to be true because you think them.

 

[InterestedAtheist]

With these threads you are simply rehashing ideas that weren’t new millennia ago. The bible is a far more sophisticated text that people generally credit it to be - it juxtaposes these kind of basic materialist notions with other realities of consciousness, experience and knowing. That there is a split between them is nothing new; the materialist constructs a way of thinking that is coherent and consistent within itself, and comes to believe that this has some externally objective validity in some overarching sense, and hence demands that everything should align with this way of thinking, and that anything outside of it must be rejected. You can’t convince someone who believes only in square boxes by showing them a round one, they’ll only insist that you make it square so that they can ‘see’ it.

That is exactly the kind of word salad you'd expect from someone who believes in something for no good reason.
Since you aren't actually saying anything there, your argument works just as well whether God exists or not.

 

[InterestedAtheist]

Spoken like a true believer! The definition of blind faith - believing things to be true because you think them.

Again, you're projecting. It's you who thinks things are true because you believe them.
Prove me wrong if you like, and address the OP - if you are able.

 

[Tom 1]

Oh, I'm sorry. Is God not a three-in-one entity, an immortal, immaterial, omnipotent entity who created heaven and earth? Am I thinking of someone else?

You’re thinking of something you made yourself to fit in with your under-developed worldview, based on a few basic impressions.

 

[Tom 1]

Again, you're projecting. It's you who thinks things are true because you believe them.
Prove me wrong if you like, and address the OP - if you are able.

Lol how can you be proved wrong? Your way of thinking is more or less consistent, you can make anything you like fit into it, provided you just stick to basic details. Your demand for proof doesn’t make sense outside of your own head.

 

[InterestedAtheist]

You’re thinking of something you made yourself to fit in with your under-developed worldview, based on a few basic impressions.

As expected, still not a scrap of proof that whatever you mean when you talk about "God" exists.
Put your money where your mouth is, why don't you?

Well. I know why not, of course.

 

[InterestedAtheist]

Lol how can you be proved wrong? Your way of thinking is more or less consistent, you can make anything you like fit into it, provided you just stick to basic details. Your demand for proof doesn’t make sense outside of your own head.

Projecting again.
And I told you how I can be proved wrong.
Proving an atheist wrong is incredibly easy.
An answered prayer or two, a credible miracle, a divine appearance a la Paul...did you read the OP? I mean, it's all there.

 

[Tom 1]

Put your money where your mouth is, why don't you?

Like what, perform a miracle? Come on, you have to realise at some point how silly these questions are.

Remembering this was never meant as a literal story, reflect on this passage:

“But Avraham said, ‘They have Moshe and the Prophets; they should listen to them.’ However, he said, ‘No, father Avraham, they need more. If someone from the dead goes to them, they’ll repent!’ But he replied, ‘If they won’t listen to Moshe and the Prophets, they won’t be convinced even if someone rises from the dead!’””
‭‭Luke (Luk)‬ ‭16:29-31‬ ‭CJB‬‬
Luke (Luk) 16:29-31 But Avraham said, ‘They have Moshe and the Prophets; they should listen to them.’ However, he said, ‘No, father Avraham, they need more. If someone from the dead goes to them, they’ll repent!’ But he | Complete Jewish Bible (CJB) | Download The Bible App Now

Give it some thought. There is nothing new about materialism, and, objectively, there is no more reason to believe in it now than there ever was. It’s not a reliable guide to anything more than itself. You’d need more than a few exchanges on the internet to really understand that however.

 

[InterestedAtheist]

Like what, perform a miracle? Come on, you have to realise at some point how silly these questions are.

Distraction again. All to try to avoid having to say the truth:
"No, we Christians have no evidence of God's existence at all."

But he replied, ‘If they won’t listen to Moshe and the Prophets, they won’t be convinced even if someone rises from the dead!’””

That's exactly the type of thing I'd say, if I were writing a book filled with miracle stories and wanted to avoid someone asking for proof that they actually happened.

Give it some thought. There is nothing new about materialism, and, objectively, there is no more reason to believe in it now than there ever was. It’s not a reliable guide to anything more than itself. You’d need more than a few exchanges on the internet to really understand that however.

No, you give it some thought.
You claim that God exists, but you have no evidence that your claim is true. Why should anyone believe you?

Can you say this?
"We Christians have no evidence of God's existence at all."

 

[Tom 1]

Distraction again. All to try to avoid having to say the truth:
"No, we Christians have no evidence of God's existence at all."


That's exactly the type of thing I'd say, if I were writing a book filled with miracle stories and wanted to avoid someone asking for proof that they actually happened.


No, you give it some thought.
You claim that God exists, but you have no evidence that your claim is true. Why should anyone believe you?

Can you say this?
"We Christians have no evidence of God's existence at all."

Certainly, there is nothing I’m aware of that would fit your definition of evidence, but what does that have to do with anything?

To make your questions useful in some sense you would first have to go through a few steps:

1) Prove that materialism is ‘true’; provide incontrovertible proof that things which are cannot be explained in materialist terms both do not and cannot exist.
2) Convincingly explain matters of consciousness and imagination and their relevance to the transmission of meaning.
3) Demonstrate a thorough understanding of the biblical texts and the culture (in all is its dimensions) it arose from.
4) Evaluate the interaction between the meanings conveyed by the text and lived experience.

If you can do that, you’d have some sort of starting point to pose useful questions. Of course you can piddle about asking pointless questions that arise from what is essentially nothing much at all, that’s up to you. Personally, I don’t see the point.

 

[InterestedAtheist]

Certainly, there is nothing I’m aware of that would fit your definition of evidence, but what does that have to do with anything?

Everything.
If you have no evidence, then why should anyone believe what you say?

Ah, you want me to prove "materialism", do you? I see you're still trying to pose distractions from the real issue.
You're the one who says that God exists. Therefore, the burden of proof is on you.

Or, you can just say:
"We Christians do not have any proof or evidence that God exists."
Can you say that? If so, good for you, I applaud your honesty.
If not, then you think that you do have evidence for God's existence - well, good! Here we are in the debating forum. Let's see it.