Critical Thinking

We Know Everything, And There Is No God


We know everything, and there is no God,” said the Atheist.

Mankind have been learning about themselves and their environments since the beginning of their recognition of their existence, whenever that beginning was.  We know that without the consciousness that we are alive, and the ability to think, to feel, to reason, to adapt, to change, to construct and to create, we would not be able to know or influence anything in our world.  We would just exist and not even know that we exist!

No matter the knowledge man has gained, it seems that they have not learned the folly of making arrogant statements about the existence of realms they cannot see, and the folly of jumping to conclusions.  Yes, make theories, and gather your evidences, but there is no certainty in any knowledge, unless you are all knowing.  The Apostle Paul said something very interesting about those who think they know it all:

And if any man think that he knoweth any thing, he knoweth nothing yet as he ought to know” (1 Cor 8:2).

I think this is an amazing truth for all kinds of thinkers, whether they be Religious, Atheists or Agnostics.  All of us should just admit the limitation of our understanding, because to claim all knowledge and understanding is to claim divinity, and such are in for the shock of their lives (Prov 16:18, 1 Cor 10:12)!

Now, the Believers have been the ones most accused of being “know-it-all”s, because we are very certain of our strongly held beliefs, which rule every aspect of our lives.  However, such ‘certainty’ is limited to the definition of ‘belief’, being “an acceptance that something exists or is true, especially one without proof” (Google).  I  do beg to offer that they are not indeed the most annoying or arrogant “know-it-all”s.  The Atheists are the chiefs of “know-it-all”s, and they are indeed the greatest of the fools (Psa 14:1).

Let’s try a little reasoning here…  I would suppose that there are three types of knowing; the knowing that is by Faith, the knowing that is by Certainty, and then there is the in-between, undecided, inconclusive thinking, that cannot truly be defined as knowing, called Doubt.  Believers profess by faith that there is a God, and the Atheists profess with certainty that there is no God (for it is only by certainty that such a claim can be made and accepted), while the Agnostics are undecided on whether or not there is a God.  The Bible says concerning the doubters (or double-minded), that they are unstable in all their ways (Jam 1:8), so these cannot be seen to be authouritative in any form of knowledge.

Therefore, it would only be reasonable that the burden of proof is laid on those who are certain that there is no God, because for them to be certain, they must have proof!  It cannot be laid on Believers.  Faith stands by REASON and not by certain evidence.  There has to be sufficient reason to hold a belief.  Believers have, for many thousands of years, tried to reason with unbelievers (quite like I am doing now), that they hold their view dangerously and unreasonably, seeing as it is a view that is impossible to support with evidence – but requires the support of evidence because it is CONCLUSIVE!

You cannot reasonably conclude that God doesn’t exist, even if you were to scan the whole universe or travel through all space and dimensions yourself!  It is not unreasonable to suggest that a God who created the whole universe would abide OUTSIDE its limitations!  And even if He chose to abide within it, since you are not like Him in any way, there is no technology you can come up with to rule out the possibility that while you are at location A, He is not at location X!  And let’s not neglect the dimension of time, to which you are limited and He is not!  You’ve set yourself up to fail, and your conclusion is illogical.  So I dare say, the view you hold requires much greater faith (based on the “reasonable” theory of Evolution) than mine, and you can be no more certain about how this whole universe began than I.

But I am not surprised by your arrogant and stubborn stance, for it is also written about the fool that he “…hath no delight in understanding, but that his heart may discover itself” (Prov 18:2).  I dare to submit that the Atheist’s resistance to the possibility that there is a God is simply because he does not want to be guided by Wisdom, but wishes only to “discover himself” and do as he pleases.   They love their foolishness, and are proud of it.  They are simply unreasonable, and as such, they cannot gain understanding nor wisdom, and all their knowledge is gained in vain.  They are kings of arguments, and somehow, they have put Believers on the defensive, with the burden of proof, being ignorant of the fact that THEY are the ones in the position of certainty and therefore burdened with the duty to provide proof, or else join the more sensible Agnostics!

This post is probably wasted on the fools, but to those with the ability to reason, to people of faith, I would like to warn against falling for the tactic of the Atheist, and running around trying to gather the proof for them so that they might believe.  They cannot and will not, unless God grants them the gift of faith and sight (Mark 4:12)!  There is no sign that can be shown that would convince them of the existence of God, if they have already acknowledged all the evidences that are before us all, and disregarded them (Matt 16:4, Luke 16:31, Rom 1:19-20).

To the militant Atheists, those committed to robbing the world of faith, I would just like to warn you of sitting too comfortably on that field of Science that you have stumbled upon, which you now sit on like a mountain and think you are above all knowledge!  You are as one sitting on a chair with one leg!  You don’t have all the pieces, no matter the abundance of things you are able to explain.

Science is beautiful and has been greatly beneficial to our world since its discovery.  But can you dare to believe that there is a realm, or even two or three more realms that you have not even come to know even 1% of…and that if you were to gain such knowledge, even what you think you know about Science must be brought again under the microscope?  Do you think your mind could comprehend that Science is just the shore of a vast ocean of knowledge that you do not have???

Don’t use Science to tell me there is no God!  Science is evidence that there is a God if there is any more need for evidence.  Our discoveries in each new year from the study of Science should help us realise that we do not even know the half of it…and tomorrow or next year, we will discover even more.  And maybe, if we were connected to the God who knows all things, and submitted to Him, He might be merciful enough to grant us knowledge that will grow our understanding and knowledge base in Science exponentially!

You need to realise that Believers are not against Science, we just see it as a small part of the much, much bigger picture!  But since you lack spiritual sight, Science is all you see.  I pray that God may soften your hearts, and open your eyes that you may truly see!

You say, ‘I am rich; I have acquired wealth and do not need a thing.’ But you do not realize that you are wretched, pitiful, poor, blind and naked.  I counsel you to buy from me gold refined in the fire, so you can become rich; and white clothes to wear, so you can cover your shameful nakedness; and salve to put on your eyes, so you can see“(Rev 3:17-18).

Photo credit: http://www.whynogod.wordpress.com

If you liked this post, you might like A WORLD WITHOUT GOD

Are you blessed by this ministry?  Why not partner with me?

SUPPORT THIS MINISTRY

becomeapatronbanner

Advertisements

34 replies »

  1. The atheist, which I am not, neither says “we know everything” nor “there is no god”. Atheism is the lack of belief. It is not the positive claim that they know everything and there is no God.
    Please correct your faulty assessment of what atheists say. It would be the honest thing to do

    Liked by 1 person

    • Hi KIA,

      Thanks for reading and commenting. I think this is where Atheists try to hide their tale between their legs, claiming that they never said something they have implied in many ways. Now, you are equating Atheists with Agnostics.

      This is the definition I pulled from Google. “disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods.” It’s funny that Google also has among the synonyms “agnosticism”, so it seems there is a deliberate confusion about what an Atheist is.

      However, those who are militant against faith in God can not claim to be undecided and be in the camp of Agnostics. They are saying loudly and clearly that they know ENOUGH, at least, to conclude that there is no God.

      Which are you then?

      Liked by 1 person

      • Okay, maybe you are right. But can you speak for all Atheists, even though you claim that you are not even one? Can you say that there is no group of Atheists or even a single Atheist who has ever declared that “there is no God”?

        I think the problem is Atheists know they can’t stand on their proclamations confidently…and I think they are actually more like the Agnostics, but someone has to play the Devil’s advocate and oppose the view that God exists, and that’s what Atheism does. By such a stance, they are saying that He does not. And if they can boldly stand on their position, it can only be because they think they know all that is needed to know and they have scanned all the evidence.

        Liked by 1 person

  2. I recently wrote this in response to a comment on my blog:

    “Atheism often gets criticized for claiming to know for certain there is no God; and truthfully, it bothers me, too. But I call myself one because my brain cannot make sense of a god concept. I am nowhere near as arrogant about knowing the truth as I was when I was a believer, though. I am indifferent about being wrong and welcome any evidence. I would call myself agnostic, except for the fact that currently I never wonder if there could be a god at all– so that doesn’t seem like a good description. It doesn’t feel like a big deal to me either way. Of course, atheism from a Christian point of view can only be someone who is arrogant and defiant. But what can I do?”

    Most atheists would not only agree, but would say they don’t even care enough to hear what I have to say about it. You are talking about a very limited group of vocal atheists who still do not exceed the vast number of vocal Christians who no doubt make you cringe.

    And as I always say: “the burden of proof lies only with the person who would ask another to agree with them.” While I may often share my story and thoughts, I assure you that I have never asked anyone to stop believing in God.

    You may not believe one can reasonably conclude that God does not exist, but it isn’t difficult to reasonably conclude that the Christian God does not exist—and then what? It is easy to not find God and simply stick with that conclusion until something better comes along. In the absence of theology, it really isn’t a big deal. Atheism is just a word. And if the Bible calls me a fool, what difference can it make?

    From my point of view, Christianity only matters in the way that it creates misunderstandings between two people who would otherwise get along just fine.

    Liked by 1 person

    • LAD, I have often found your responses confusing.

      – Your brain cannot make sense of a god concept. [okay, whatever that means]
      – You’re not as arrogant about knowing the truth, as when you were a believer. [So which truth is it that you now know and is not as arrogant about?]
      – You’re indifferent about being wrong. [ This is quite alarming and perplexing, especially for one who has knowledge of Christianity]

      – [What difference would evidence make to you if you’re indifferent about being wrong?]
      – [If you never wonder if there could be a God at all, what’s the point of welcoming any evidence?]
      – [So you never wonder if there’s a God at all, and your brain cannot make sense of a “god concept”- hard to believe; but in any event, this suggests to me that you just don’t know and you are basically throwing, your hands in the air with an attitude of que sera, sera (whatever will be will be)

      “It is easy to not find God and simply stick with that conclusion until something better comes along” – Interesting. And in the meantime, the person edges closer to the grave without the benefit of anything ‘better coming along’… only a foolish gambler would live that way or one who knows beyond the shadow of a doubt that there is absolutely no God.
      – God is not lost. you are.

      “Atheism is just a word. And if the Bible calls me a fool, what difference can it make?”,/em> – Time to start thinking and acting mature. Atheism is not just a word. Words have meaning. Our words have meaning. They either administer life or death. You choose either life or death with your words.
      It’s one thing for another human being to call another a fool, it’s quite something else when God refers to such a rebellious character as a fool. If anyone should know who or what a fool is, that would be God.
      If words had no meaning, atheists would not be reacting so viscerally to being called a fool.

      It’s foolish to not know everything, yet pretend to, it’s foolish to elevate one’s throne above The Most High’s. Once again, ‘only a god can declare that there is no God’.
      I
      The good news is, at the end, we’ll all find out who was right.

      Liked by 1 person

      • This is an excellent and challenging response to Jenny’s comment, Ancients! I’m glad I waited til the morning to make mine, because there were just too many potholes in her argument that would send someone to confusion. I am really looking forward to how she addresses your points.

        I will withhold further comment as I don’t think it’s necessary, seeing how you’ve opened her arguments for further inspection. Thanks again for your powerful contribution to this post.

        Cheers!

        Liked by 1 person

  3. I agree with everything you have to say here. You have ‘read’ and understand these guys very well.
    It’s not enough for them to say they’re agnostic/skeptics because that would mean having to be skeptical about their very skepticism…and somehow this just doesn’t fit the pseudo-scientific profile they’re trying to project, hence they have to go full-on atheist (know-it-all).

    However, when presented with the facts in a reasonable and logical manner as you have done here, they have no choice but to revert to being skeptics. And, as you’ve pointed out and confirmed by KIA, they are not content to be just agnostics (that’s too wishy-washy), they must now confuse both terms by interchanging them and somehow manage to claim to be both.

    At the end of the day, neither agnosticism nor atheism are tenable positions. The agnostic is doubtful of his very own beliefs, while the atheist has declared himself to be a god. As my friend Lyle puts it: “only a god, would know there is no God.”

    Great post.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Thanks so much for your contribution! I’m glad we’re seeing the same problem! When it is convenient they say “there is no God”, and when they are made to see the error there, they revert back to doubt… They are indeed unstable in all their ways…

      Thanks for adding your voice to this 🙂

      Liked by 1 person

  4. Why would God choose to live in a realm that we are unable to see, and expect us to believe in him?

    The other problem I have with your argument is that choosing belief over science, belief in something we cannot see and therefore cannot prove doesn’t exist, puts thousands of other Gods on the same pedestal as yours. What’s your stance on Zeus? Just because we can’t see him it would be foolish to think he doesn’t exist.

    Liked by 1 person

    • 1, Why would God choose to live in a realm that we are unable to see, and expect us to believe in him? – Maybe you can ask Him that when you meet Him. Being omnipresent means He’s everywhere all at once in every time, but your inability to perceive Him is not because He doesn’t exist, because others have perceived Him and enjoy a relationship with Him. Yet, I do not believe He is sitting somewhere waiting to be found.

      2. The other problem I have with your argument is that choosing belief over science – Sorry, if you read my post, you will know I appreciate science and do not disregard it, so I don’t know why you would say I choose science over belief…

      3. belief in something we cannot see and therefore cannot prove doesn’t exist, puts thousands of other Gods on the same pedestal as yours – maybe for you it does, but for someone who has a relationship with God, they know that there is none like Him. It is only those who never knew God that would be swayed by idols.

      4. What’s your stance on Zeus? Just because we can’t see him it would be foolish to think he doesn’t exist – because I know Jehovah, I know that Zeus is no god at all, and there would be no foolishness in thinking he doesn’t exist.

      I think the problem you are having here is my ability to know God and your inability to do so. My position of faith is not in question. Like I have pointed out, I am not burdened with a duty to prove anything, because if I did, it would cease to be a belief. But if you are certain that there is no God, then you are required to prove this…otherwise, relocate yourself to the Agnostic table.

      Cheers, Ufuoma.

      Liked by 1 person

      • This relationship you talk of, I assume means you have become rather close. How would you define your relationship? What exactly convinces you that you have one with God?

        Like

      • Thanks for asking. Yes, we are getting closer, and I am learning more about Him day by day. I would say our relationship is like Father and child. Because He is a Spirit, I do not see or touch Him, and we do not have audible discussions. But through the Spirit He has given me, we communicate…

        The last question is probably worthy of a post, because there isn’t a singular thing that has brought me to the conviction that I have about my relationship with God. For now, it will be sufficient for me to say He has made Himself known to me, and our relationship is very important to me. https://ufuomaee.com/2015/08/11/if-i-didnt-believe-in-god/

        Like

      • How are you getting closer? What is he doing today more than he did yesterday? To say that the relationship is like father and child is over exaggerating, in my opinion.

        Like

      • I am the one drawing closer to Him, as I learn to be more gracious and loving, and I learn to submit to His wisdom. I can’t tell you what He is doing more today than yesterday, because I am just one of His many children, just like you couldn’t possibly tell me what more your father is doing today than yesterday…because you probably don’t know him as intimately as he knows you. If you could, then it probably means your father is idle or elderly and finished with all his work. Mine isn’t!

        God exists apart from me. I don’t have all knowledge of Him, but in my life, He is pruning me and teaching me, leading me and using me. https://ufuomaee.com/2016/02/27/give-god-an-inch/

        You say: “To say that the relationship is like father and child is over exaggerating”

        But what do you know about it? How can you form an opinion on something you do not even comprehend? He is more than my Father, He is also my King. And more than that, He is my Lover – the Lover of my soul. You can’t begin to comprehend our relationship, because there’s no relationship on Earth like it.

        Like

      • But you admit that you hardly have any knowledge of him, to me that isn’t a relationship. You’re more of a fan. And if my father was still here (he passed away 3 years ago) he would do as he always did, telling me what he was doing daily. It doesn’t make him idle, elderly or ‘finished with his work’ it means the exact opposite, he was a great father.

        Like

      • That’s OK, R.E. I didn’t truly expect that you would understand and say “I believe now”. I fully expected it would be a pointless exercise with you ignoring what I’m actually saying and coming out thinking exactly what you thought I would say. That was the point of your questioning, to prove I was a “fanatic” and not actually a “knower” of God. I hope you sleep better with that concluded.

        May your father rest in peace.

        My earthly father is a business man. He loves me dearly. I know I have a relationship with him even though we don’t see or speak daily. He has shown me his love over the years. Sometimes I know his plans. Most times, I don’t. He travels a lot, all around the country and out doing a lot of businesses and politics. I imagine his life is so full and I couldn’t tell you what more he achieved today than yesterday. And even if I were to ask him that strange question, I believe he would save me a bulk of the details, not least because it’s none of my business and there’s no need for me to carry the burdens he shoulders. But I’m not a fanatic. I know him. He is my father.

        Have a blessed day, Ufuoma.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Thank you. But your earthly father would make himself present if you needed him, right? If you were needing his support he would be with you physically and show himself when you needed him to? Why doesn’t God do this in such an obvious way?

        Like

      • God makes Himself known and felt to those who believe in Him. And often He comforts us through others. He has appeared in the form of angels in the past, and He continues to reveal Himself to His children in this and other ways.

        But we communicate with our Father by our spirit, because He is Spirit. He may take physical form, as He did through Jesus, but being God He has no obligation to appear to us the way we demand, but in a way that honours Him. And He chooses to reveal Himself to those who believe. So, you may never confirm my experience to be true, if you do not have faith in God yourself.

        Cheers, Ufuoma.

        Like

      • Why does he choose to reveal himself to those that believe? Wouldn’t it be wise to show himself to those that don’t believe? This would help tidy up the confusion and mess the world is in.

        Like

      • I think I’ve done my best to answer your questions, which to me border on being ridiculous and redundant. I sense you are a time-waster who is not seeking to understand but to pester me endlessly with your why oh why oh why questions.

        Try some faith and humility, and perhaps God will make Himself known to you. I don’t have a manual on Him or why He does things. He’s also not a puppet, but a God. When you appreciate the difference, perhaps your questions will be different, and you will actually get answers that satisfy.

        All the best.

        Like

  5. Yes Ancients, your confusion is obvious. You have missed the point entirely. Your line by line questioning gives you the ability to misunderstand the wording of particular sentences and focus on that– rather than simply hear what a person is trying to say. I don’t understand you guys. Ufuomaee thinks this is a challenging response? It didn’t address the main point of what I said even once. It’s so far away from hearing what I said, I have no idea how to respond to it.

    Look, I originally read this post and responded to it because of how much it misunderstands the mind of most atheists, who do not live under the assumption that Christian theology is true. If you want to talk about how stupid atheists are for not seeing there must have been a creator, then leave the Bible verses out of it. Because you will never meet an atheist who equates the possibility of a creator with the possibility of the Christian version of that creator.

    If you take away everything the Bible tells you about God, you are left with nothing more than a God who created everything. No sin, redemption, heaven, hell– or even a clue as to whether or not it knows us. We know nothing. So start there when you attempt to analyze me. Now, here is a line by line response for your enjoyment:

    – Your brain cannot make sense of a god concept. [okay, whatever that means]

    It means for many of us, the creator concept is not any more compelling than what science offers. We do not choose to fill in what we do not know with God, and we are not satisfied with answers to the question: what created God? There are too many unknowns for us to pluck out this one ancient concept and go with it– I would say it even feels silly to us.

    – You’re not as arrogant about knowing the truth, as when you were a believer. [So which truth is it that you now know and is not as arrogant about?]

    “Knowing the truth” as a Christian. You just read my wording wrong. Sorry.

    – You’re indifferent about being wrong. [ This is quite alarming and perplexing, especially for one who has knowledge of Christianity]

    In the context I have clearly described twice (you know, about how without theology God is undefined)– there is not only nothing to fear about being wrong, but there is no way to be right. So yes, what else can I be but indifferent?

    – [What difference would evidence make to you if you’re indifferent about being wrong?]

    I welcome evidence because I have nothing to lose by it. Seriously, how was the sentence” ” I am indifferent about being wrong and welcome any evidence” confusing?

    – [If you never wonder if there could be a God at all, what’s the point of welcoming any evidence?]

    Are you kidding? As long as the God concept does not make sense to me and new evidence has yet to change my mind, I don’t sit around thinking about whether or not God exists anymore. This is why I call myself an atheist rather than an agnostic. It isn’t that I claim to understand everything about the universe, it’s just that if I am still in a place where God doesn’t feel logical, I don’t identify with the agnostic way of thinking. But again, without theological rules it really is okay to think that. There is no consequence. If new evidence compels me to think about God, then great. I of course will do that. This is such a simple and obvious conclusion it feels weird to even break it down for someone.

    – [So you never wonder if there’s a God at all, and your brain cannot make sense of a “god concept”- hard to believe; but in any event, this suggests to me that you just don’t know and you are basically throwing, your hands in the air with an attitude of que sera, sera (whatever will be will be)

    I have already answered this. But throwing my hands in the air? As opposed to what, exactly? Maybe this is the heart of the problem, Ancients. You say: ” this suggests to me that you just don’t know and you are basically throwing, your hands in the air with an attitude of que sera, sera (whatever will be will be).” Let’s talk about that. Because in an environment where none of us can prove God, we are all in the same boat of “knowing.” We each choose what makes the most sense to us and say that is what we believe—but leaving a little room for being wrong isn’t a bad thing to me.

    God doesn’t make sense to me, so I call myself an atheist. I can explain why I feel that way to you, but I have not asked you to agree with me. I cannot even begin to wrap my mind around your need to go line by line and criticize my thoughts on it. I didn’t go line by line on the original post and explain why each point about Christianity is wrong, I simply took another stab at explaining how she was missing the mark in her views of how I think, personally. Why are we doing this?

    – “It is easy to not find God and simply stick with that conclusion until something better comes along” – Interesting. And in the meantime, the person edges closer to the grave without the benefit of anything ‘better coming along’… only a foolish gambler would live that way or one who knows beyond the shadow of a doubt that there is absolutely no God.

    Please tell me you have a better understanding now of what I meant here: I cannot fill in the blanks with something I don’t believe. I just can’t.

    – God is not lost. you are.

    – “Atheism is just a word. And if the Bible calls me a fool, what difference can it make?”,/em> – Time to start thinking and acting mature. Atheism is not just a word. Words have meaning. Our words have meaning. They either administer life or death. You choose either life or death with your words.
    It’s one thing for another human being to call another a fool, it’s quite something else when God refers to such a rebellious character as a fool. If anyone should know who or what a fool is, that would be God.

    -If words had no meaning, atheists would not be reacting so viscerally to being called a fool.

    -It’s foolish to not know everything, yet pretend to, it’s foolish to elevate one’s throne above The Most High’s. Once again, ‘only a god can declare that there is no God’.

    -The good news is, at the end, we’ll all find out who was right.

    (This is all Christian theology talk, which is completely irrelevant to me.)

    But you left out my last line: “From my point of view, Christianity only matters in the way that it creates misunderstandings between two people who would otherwise get along just fine.”

    I’m just trying to explain my point of view. I’m not asking you to agree, only to better understand. And you don’t. But not only are you unable to understand, but you actually delight in breaking it down and making fun of how stupid I am. It is your Christianity, specifically, which makes you love me less. And that is the only message I am receiving. You cheer each other on, and believe you are making such great points about the errors in my thinking. But you prove again and again that you cannot grasp the first thing about how I think.

    It’s always a debate with you two; never a discussion about how two different people can see the world. And why? Not because of God, but because of how you define God. You still think I choose what makes sense to me out of some rebellious stupidity—and because of the Bible, I can never change your mind. And then you have the nerve to accuse me of being the one who claims to know everything.

    Like

    • Hi Jenny,

      I think maybe you are the wrong audience for this post, because the Atheists I am referring to in my post are the ones who say “There is no God” and who project that they know everything. I know you will not deny the existence of these, as KIA sought to. In case you’re think they are like a needle in a haystack, they are not. Just google “There is no God”.

      It might be unfair of me to lump all Atheists in one boat, just as it would be unfair to lump all Christians in one boat. But there seems to be a serious identity confusion among Atheists. Your initial comment revealed that you do not truly know where your beliefs fit, but clearly you are an unbeliever in the God of the Bible. So if you are not saying conclusively that there is no God, you would not be of the category of Atheists I am addressing. Note also my address to “militant Atheists who seek to rob the world of Faith”.

      It may be better moving forward to consider the definitions used in the post for Believers, Agnostics and Atheists, in which case, you are among the Agnostics, since you are still open. Atheists have an agenda to squash faith, and if that’s not you, I don’t know why you would want to be classified with them. But if you desire to squash faith and declare that there is no God, whether gently or aggressively, loudly or quietly, you are still an Atheist on a mission in my book.

      For me, the main issue is to whom does the burden of proof belong. It seems to be a buck being tossed about between Atheists and Believers. Atheists say the burden is on believers because we want to convert the world. Yes, over to belief. Check the definition of belief. It isn’t brain-washing. It’s an opinion reached by reason, and no one is forced to believe. This is not the crusades. If you don’t believe, say you don’t and I’ll pray that maybe someone else might convince you, but I won’t attack you for not believing. But don’t tell me I need to bring you a list of evidences, many of which you have already chosen to reject as unacceptable. The proof you are seeking, apart from reason, will mean that you do not actually come to believe anything…so you can’t be called a Believer.

      The burden of proof can only be laid on those not operating from Faith, who are certain that there is no God. Atheists shrink from this, and then say that they belong in the ‘Doubt’ category…when all the while they have been making speeches of certainty and throwing around all sorts of reasonings that they call evidence! This is because they don’t want to accept that they too hold their lack of beliefs by faith in something other than Jesus! Their faith is in Science and Evolution, primarily. But when you tell them they are behaving like “believers”, like a worm, they return to certainty. So, you can’t catch them out!

      Anyway, thanks for the chat. I appreciate you taking the time to air your views on my blog.

      Have a good day, Ufuoma.

      Like

      • Back to what I said the first time:

        1. “You are talking about a very limited group of vocal atheists who still do not exceed the vast number of vocal Christians who no doubt make you cringe.”

        I mean, when there are so many more “there absolutely is a God” Christians seeking to squash atheism, I have no idea why you even bother talking about this. And for the record, currently I am as open to the idea of there being a God as you are to the idea of there not being one. So I’m still not identifying as agnostic. My willingness to accept evidence that I never expect to see is hardly a sign that I am still questioning God’s existence. It just means I like to think I do not create an impenetrable force field around my thinking.

        2. “And as I always say: ‘the burden of proof lies only with the person who would ask another to agree with them.'”

        Burden of proof arguments are such a waste of time. Is someone actually going to prove whether or not God exists today? There is this weird idea out there that proving one’s opponent is responsible for proof is somehow a success. I don’t get it. It’s completely meaningless. If you are asking someone to believe in God, the burden of proof is on you. If you are asking someone to stop believing in God, the burden of proof is also on you. And guess what? It still won’t matter.

        Like

      • “I am referring to in my post are the ones who say “There is no God” and who project that they know everything.”

        In other words, people who exist only in your imagination.

        Like

    • Jenny, you were not misunderstood. Your ideology is confused because it’s not well thought out nor is it coherent. It desires to be thought of as one thing, when clearly that’s not what it’s projecting.

      Your comment could be summarized as follows: ” I do not believe there is a God. My brain cannot make sense of a God-concept. [even though you speak incorrectly all the time of how Christians view God]. I am indifferent (not interested in nor concerned about) being wrong [about God]; however, I welcome any evidence because I have nothing to lose by it. I call myself an atheist rather than an agnostic because God doesn’t make sense to me, nor do I sit around and think if one exists or not.
      This is not rational nor lucid thinking.

      This was your next line. I’ll leave it here, because your confusion speaks for itself.
      LAD: “It isn’t that I claim to understand everything about the universe, it’s just that if I am still in a place where God doesn’t feel logical, I don’t identify with the agnostic way of thinking…

      Theology is simply the study of God (Christian or not).

      No one is asking you to agree with them, and this is a discussion, not a debate. However this goes back to words having meaning and us adhering to the meanings of words. When we change the meaning of names and words to fit our own agenda then all we’re doing is creating confusion which leads to chaos.

      Self-identified atheists shun being called agnostics because they know agnosticism is wishy-washy and by virtue of being naturally skeptic, an agnostic has nothing to bring to a conversation except its own skepticism of everything.
      So the agnostic relabels themselves an “atheist” to appear to be a logical thinker – all the while ignoring the very meaning of what it means to be an atheist.

      I ignored your last line: “From my point of view, Christianity only matters in the way that it creates misunderstandings between two people who would otherwise get along just fine.”
      because it was and still is wrong.
      While there is some truth that misunderstandings do exist between 2 people of different beliefs; this is absolutely not the reason for Christianity. This is far removed from why Christianity matters.
      Christianity is about Christ, His reconciliation of God and man; it’s about sharing the good news to those who are poor (in spirit…in pride…) to those who are (spiritually & even physically) blind, and deaf, to those in darkness and in need, to those who will receive it.

      You’re wrong in saying that God cannot be proven. God has already proven Himself to every single person born on this earth. The fact that the evidence is not enough for you, does not negate the proof.
      A person who is seeking additional proof must do so out of humility. “God’s humility [in presenting Himself to Thomas] brought Thomas to a place of surrender. God will meet the skeptics if they are willing to look at the evidence that He gives them. Jesus can turn doubt into belief.”

      Liked by 1 person

      • Okay. You find my thinking incoherent and irrational, but you claim to understand me completely. Then you tell me more about Christianity. You are right, Ancients. I have never felt anyone has ever understood me better. Oh, and thanks for proving God’s existence! And since I have noticed that you often take what I say so literally that your responses make me chuckle– yes, this is sarcasm. And not polite sarcasm, either. Because at this point your need to tell me how wrong I am not to think exactly the way you do is insulting.

        Like

      • Well, I would have to understand what you’re saying in order to conclude it’s incoherent and irrational, no.

        You’re not wrong because you do not think like me. You’re wrong because what you said has no basis in fact or in truth.

        A prideful spirit is one that cannot be taught.

        Liked by 1 person

Tell me what you think...

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s