Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own eyes (Prov. 26:5)
Atheism is an irrational belief system that denies God’s existence. Proponents of atheism opine that life happened by random chance, and that people are just matter in motion. According to an atheistic worldview, chemicals formed in a primordial soup, which eventually became a living cell. Human beings are now evolved animals who are forced to live in a relativistic world that is in a constant state of flux, and where “survival of the fittest” is the law of the land.
There are many atheists who profess to be wise, but the Bible declares them to be fools (Prov. 1:7, 29; Rom. 1:22-23), since their assertions are not factual—they are fiction (1 Tim. 6:20-21). How can inert matter become a cognizant creature who can love, apply logic, have morals, and reason coherently? Without God’s intervention, it cannot—which is why the atheistic worldview should be viewed as absurd.
A profession of atheism is not an indisputable fact; on the contrary, it is a fallacy. Everyone is intuitively aware of God’s existence; therefore, there are only professing atheists. Without God, professing atheists can use logic, but they cannot account for it. Only the Christian’s worldview can account for the universal, invariant, abstract laws of logic, which are necessary to make sense out of anything. The atheistic worldview denies that anything can be universal, invariant, or immaterial, while simultaneously using the universal, invariant, and immaterial laws of logic to reason. This is one reason professing atheists have to borrow from the Christian’s worldview—apart from the Christian worldview, it would be impossible to prove anything.
Atheistic disputations over the existence of God affirm the existence of God. When professing atheists deny God or demand proof of God’s existence, they are assuming logic—which is not conventional, but universal, immaterial, and invariant. In addition, when professing atheists argue with theists about the existence of God, they are arguing about truth. This is ironic, since it would be impossible to dialogue about truth unless truth exists, which is something the professing atheist, who affirms relativism, will vehemently deny.
Professing atheists habitually slander God as a tyrannical despot, and they claim that His Word is wrong. However, they are only perpetuating their hypocrisy, since there is no such thing as evil and wrong in their relativistic and arbitrary worldview, and they are not able to prove that God’s Word is false. They are only able to beg the question, and prove that they do not like God. However, professing atheists do not reject God’s Word because God contradicts Himself; they reject God because His word contradicts them. It is ironic how professing atheists do not habitually slander Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, the Tooth Fairy, or leprechauns. This is because professing atheists are intuitively aware that none of the aforementioned fairy tale creatures exist. They slander God because they know He exists—but because they love their sin, they suppress the truth, and act according to their nature (Gen. 6:5).
There are professing atheists who argue that knowledge can only be true if it is observed directly, or using the scientific method. How should Christians respond to this? Tell the professing atheist: “If knowledge can only be true if it is based on observation, how do you know that?” “Have you observed that?” “Please explain how you have observed knowledge?” This is a fallacy, since all knowledge has not been observed. According to Cornelius Van Til: “They are trying to put beads on a string with no holes on the beads. They have no universals to hold things together.”
Atheistic evolution is an absurd belief. If human beings are nothing more than chemical accidents, their brains are basically chemical mush that reacts over time. This fallacious belief is an epistemological nightmare since it denies uniformity, universals, and invariance, and therefore, rationality and coherency are impossible. This is why evolution is absurd and intellectually schizophrenic, since this worldview borrows from the theistic worldview and simultaneously rejects it.
Christians must argue from the impossibility of the contrary—that only the Christian worldview can account for the preconditions of intelligibility. The transcendental argument is not an axiomatic argument, since that would be begging the question. A super-naturalistic worldview is the only worldview that can account for the laws of logic, metaphysics, epistemology, ethics, universals, uniformity of nature, aesthetics, reason, and the ability for the mind to understand the world. On the contrary, people with a naturalistic worldview cannot account for anything unless they borrow from the Christian worldview.
***ME***
***YOU***
Sent from my iPad
atheism belief
Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own eyes (Prov. 26:5)
Atheism is an irrational belief system that denies God’s existence. Proponents of atheism opine that life happened by random chance,
***ME***
You suck at Science.
***YOU***
and that people are just matter in motion.
***ME***
I have never heard anyone but Theists say that.
***YOU***
According to an atheistic worldview,
***ME***
There is no “Atheist worldview”
***YOU***
chemicals formed in a primordial soup, which eventually became a living cell. Human beings are now evolved animals who are forced to live in a relativistic world
***ME***
What’s a “relativistic world”? How can dirt be democratic?
***YOU***
that is in a constant state of flux,
***ME***
nnnnn… nnnoooo… I’m not clear what you think you’re describing.
***YOU***
and where “survival of the fittest” is the law of the land.
***ME***
“Survival of the fittest” is an oversimplification of Evolution. In order to even make sense, both the words “survival” and “fittest” need a LOT of explaining.
***YOU***
There are many atheists who profess to be wise, but the Bible declares them to be fools (Prov. 1:7, 29; Rom. 1:22-23),
***ME***
It also declares bats to be birds and the Earth is flat.
***YOU***
since their assertions are not factual—
***ME***
What assertion?
***YOU***
they are fiction (1 Tim. 6:20-21). How can inert matter become a cognizant creature who can love, apply logic, have morals, and reason coherently? Without God’s intervention, it cannot—which is why the atheistic worldview should be viewed as absurd.
***ME***
If you’re gonna try to call someone else an idiot, try to demonstrate that you understand Science AT LEAST as well as they do.
***YOU***
A profession of atheism
***ME***
What profession?
***YOU***
is not an indisputable fact; on the contrary, it is a fallacy.
***ME***
And that “profession” is…?
***YOU***
Everyone is intuitively aware of God’s existence;
***ME***
We’re not. We’re Atheists you idiot.
***YOU***
therefore, there are only professing atheists.
***ME***
We’re Atheists. We don’t believe in your god because your bible is bull****, and amongst the bull****is strawmen like that.
***YOU***
Without God, professing atheists can use logic, but they cannot account for it.
***ME***
This is the kind of anti-logic logic Theists use that makes my head hurt. You are literally painfully stupid. You make the veins next to my eyeballs feel hot.
***YOU***
Only the Christian’s worldview can account for the universal, invariant, abstract laws of logic, which are necessary to make sense out of anything. The atheistic worldview
***ME***
There’s no such thing as an “Atheist worldview”.
***YOU***
denies that anything can be universal, invariant, or immaterial, while simultaneously using the universal, invariant, and immaterial laws of logic to reason.
***ME***
Presuppositionalists get it all completely backwards.
You think “there is no god” is the starting point and logic itself is optional. No, Logic is the MAIN thing I believe in. Atheism is the CONCLUSION of everything else I believe, not the starting point. I’m not even a Strong Atheist.
Of course, presups promote the idea of drawing conclusions BEFORE you think, so of course they get it backwards.
Come to think of it, you guys are basically Bizarro smart people.
***YOU***
This is one reason professing atheists have to borrow from the Christian’s worldview—
***ME***
I have never understood what Theists mean by that or how it works.
***YOU***
apart from the Christian worldview, it would be impossible to prove anything.
***ME***
Do you have any intention of proving that or at least backing up your assertion? Why Jehovah? Why not Prometheus?
***YOU***
Atheistic disputations over the existence of God affirm the existence of God. When professing atheists deny God or demand proof of God’s existence, they are assuming logic—which is not conventional, but universal, immaterial, and invariant.
***ME***
This is called Reification fallacy. You are treating abstract concepts like real physical objects and claiming they “came from” somewhere.
***YOU***
In addition, when professing atheists argue with theists about the existence of God, they are arguing about truth. This is ironic, since it would be impossible to dialogue about truth unless truth exists, which is something the professing atheist, who affirms relativism, will vehemently deny.
***ME***
I’m not a relativist and “there is no truth” doesn’ even make sense. How would that even work?
Truth = Reality. The oposite of the truth is lies, but lies are a contradiction between apearence and Reality, so even lies can’t exist without Reality to contrast it.
If we’re in the Matrix, the Machines are Truth. If we’re in Dark City, the Strangers are the Truth.
So how the hell would that work? No word games, no philosophical bull****, no metaphores, I want you to tell me, literally, technically, how the hell a world with no “Truth” in it would work.
***YOU***
Professing atheists habitually slander God as a tyrannical despot, and they claim that His Word is wrong.
***ME***
Don’t believe us? Read your own bloody book.
***YOU***
However, they are only perpetuating their hypocrisy, since there is no such thing as evil and wrong in their relativistic and arbitrary worldview,
***ME***
You JUST SAID we think your god is evil. Therefore, we DO have a sense of good and bad independant of Jehovah.
Make up your mind!
***YOU***
and they are not able to prove that God’s Word is false.
***ME***
Are you talking about Genesis or Deutoronomy? Your mythology is false AND evil, but they are not for the same reasons, and mixing them together like that is confusing.
***YOU***
They are only able to beg the question, and prove that they do not like God. However, professing atheists do not reject God’s Word because God contradicts Himself;
***ME***
Yes we do.
***YOU***
they reject God because His word contradicts them. It is ironic how professing atheists do not habitually slander Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, the Tooth Fairy, or leprechauns.
***ME***
Has anyone ever been killed in the name of Santa?
***YOU***
This is because professing atheists are intuitively aware that none of the aforementioned fairy tale creatures exist. They slander God because they know He exists—
***ME***
That doesn’t make any sense.
***YOU***
but because they love their sin, they suppress the truth, and act according to their nature (Gen. 6:5).
***ME***
Most of us were born Christian like you, you know. We come from Christian families. We are related to you. We share DNA. My brother is the most religious person in my family, I’m the least religious.
Therefore, our nature is your nature.
***YOU***
There are professing atheists who argue that knowledge can only be true if it is observed directly, or using the scientific method. How should Christians respond to this?
***ME***
By proving something?
***YOU***
Tell the professing atheist: “If knowledge can only be true if it is based on observation, how do you know that?”
***ME***
*FACEPALM*
So… your response to a request to back up your position with Science or at least logic… is to argue against the very notion of Science or logic.
***YOU***
“Have you observed that?” “Please explain how you have observed knowledge?” This is a fallacy,
***ME***
No it isn’t. I don’t even know what logic you’re using.
***YOU***
since all knowledge has not been observed. According to Cornelius Van Til: “They are trying to put beads on a string with no holes on the beads. They have no universals to hold things together.”
***ME***
Gravity.
***YOU***
Atheistic evolution is an absurd belief. If human beings are nothing more than chemical accidents,
***ME***
That’s not evolution.
***YOU***
their brains are basically chemical mush that reacts over time.
***ME***
You mean… think?
***YOU***
This fallacious belief
***ME***
strawman. this fallacious strawman. It is not our belief, it is your rediculous version of our beliefs. It is a strawman.
***YOU***
is an epistemological nightmare since it denies uniformity, universals, and invariance, and therefore, rationality and coherency are impossible.
***ME***
No.
***YOU***
This is why evolution is absurd and intellectually schizophrenic,
***ME***
No it isn’t. It’s a fairy straight foreward field of Science.
***YOU***
since this worldview borrows from the theistic worldview and simultaneously rejects it.
***ME***
A) evolution is biology. it has nothing to do with the world, that’s geography.
B) How does “borrow from our worldview” work exactly?
***YOU***
Christians must argue from the impossibility of the contrary—that only the Christian worldview can account for the preconditions of intelligibility.
***ME***
No, you have to either use actual logic or back up that claim that logic comes from Jehovah not Thor.
***YOU***
The transcendental argument is not an axiomatic argument, since that would be begging the question. A super-naturalistic worldview is the only worldview that can account for the laws of logic, metaphysics, epistemology, ethics, universals, uniformity of nature, aesthetics, reason, and the ability for the mind to understand the world.
***ME***
And you intend to prove this by…?
***YOU***
On the contrary, people with a naturalistic worldview cannot account for anything unless they borrow from the Christian worldview.
Dr. Sonny Hernandez
***ME***
Well, that was nonsense and unoriginal .