A Letter To Atheist

Reality check. Just a little something for the one hit wonder Atheist that don’t have any discussion points except…

“Hand him over“?

Logically, if the personal God of the Bible exist, then He would have a choice in this debate, to become a rock or other such inanimate object (that has no choice but to be ‘handed over’).

Logically, if God does exist, then how reasonable is it to say, “if you can’t hand me God, he can’t logically exist”?

This statement is equally as silly…

“If you can’t produce physical evidence of a nonphysical (or spiritual) aspect of our physical universe, then I can logically assume it doesn’t exist”. This is also an oxymoron.

If Jesus can travel between different worlds and realms, and actually holds the keys to death and life (as recorded in Scripture), then it is entirely possible, logical, and reasonable to assume that He would do so for humility (also as recorded), and totally ignore arrogance, and pride, (again, as recorded).

I’m sorry, but you have no logical grounds to say God can’t exist because He validates His existence according to the protocol recorded in Scripture, but not for people that don’t know how to follow simple instructions, or refuse to.

You really want us to “demonstrate God”?
“Reproduce God”
You really want to test God at the lab, to make sure He’s God?

Ironically, the people that make these absurd request would do just that, if they could, which they can’t. Thank God it has not one thing to do with reality. You neither have a logical argument, nor a reasonable one. In fact, the scientist that are also Christians actually followed this protocol, and obtained the evidence that now supports their claim of the knowledge of God’s existence. This is no longer “belief”; we know God. In Scripture this protocol is referred to as ordinances, because (duhh) they have to be done in order.

I’m pretty sure “show me you’re real now God or else” is out of order. The very first ordinance is to humble yourself… so I’m sorry arrogance, you get nothing.

If you guys actually do want evidence, then do the research according to the protocol. If you follow the protocol, you’ll get your evidence. If not, go ahead and die thinking spiritual people are just not as skeptical as you. Keep thinking we  just believe a story such as this without verification, and valid evidence. I’m not stupid, and needed just as much evidence as you now say you do.

But you’re like someone claiming that there is no evidence for anything microscopic, then try to justify this view by refusing to use a microscope.

I got my evidence by following the rules. Get your own. or you will die refusing anything you can’t rule over.  Testimony is God’s choice for taking excuses away from people that will face a judgment call. So those of you that think you die and “it’s over”, Fyi I have actually died so I know there is “another place”… and no, science can’t know anything about that either, FULL STOP. They can’t know if a minute “here” is a year “there”, or even if there is a “there”. Scientist dig holes in the ground and measure rocks, so they will never find evidence of anything spiritual. They don’t have a clue, nor will they ever find one by digging holes in the ground.

If you keep doing what you’re doing, you’re gonna get what you already have, but if you want evidence, it’s “there”….not “here”, and it damn sure isn’t in my pocket.
-Peace

Religion. Testing 1, 2, 3,

Jesus often teaches with analogy, or ‘parable’. There is a good reason for that. I will attempt to explain some things the same way.

Basically, when people turn to religion….why do they?
They are looking for “something”.
They have a feeling that gnaws at their mind, just below waking consciousness. The feeling that there is something else to life that they are not ‘getting’.
What is this “something else”?

Some people think they are a Christians because of the things they decide to do, such as go to Church, pray, read, feed the poor, etc…

Questions:

Does spending a lot of time in a garage make you a car?

Can the constant reading of a book about playing the guitar give you the ability to play a guitar?

Does praying for the ability to play an instrument cause instant ability? No, but it could cause you to spill your coffee on a guitarist that you become friends with, and change the course of your personal reality.

What I am getting at is that religion is a practice, not a club to join. Muslim, Buddhist, and Christian…there are many flavors to choose from, just like Rock, Country, and R&B. But what is the real issue with “religion”? Simple.

We are born with the limited use of only five senses. These are relied on solely to experience reality. Religion is the path to that “something else”, that we are aware of, but can’t put our finger on. It is the path back to Christmas morning. The path to the rest of the boxes we have yet to open under the tree of life!

Christianity isn’t really much different than all religious teaching in it’s original form. If practiced, most religious teachings will bring you to the same realization…

that we are not limited to these five senses.

The difference, if you can call it that, is that Christ is the way….for Christians, while Buddha is the way for Buddhist people. There is another difference. Jesus has “prepared a place for you” that is not the place you will find yourself in if you follow another teacher. Many Christians see this as an opportunity to belittle another path, when Jesus teaches us to find a common ground instead.

An Analogy For Atheist

Christians claim to see things many others do not. Naturally, there is an argument. When a religion is “practiced”, there are very specific exercises that must be followed to the letter, and a level of discipline has to be adopted. The same thing applies when a guitar is practiced, and the same discipline is required. This is why Christians are called “disciples”, and Jesus was referred to as “Rabboni” (which means Teacher).

These ‘lessons‘ are designed to exercise areas of your brain you have always had, but have never “used”. Just as there are areas of the brain that allow you to see the things you now see, there are other areas that will allow different perceptions. You may think the nut that is talking to someone that isn’t really there has a “disorder”, when you may actually have one instead.

A guy that can play country music on a guitar can also play rock, or any other music he wants to listen to, but he will have to practice it first. The method you use to get from not being able to play Rock, to being able to play Rock, will be the same if you want to play R&B. No matter the genre, or religion, there is a very strict discipline you will have to follow, and a very strict regiment of practice if you want to see this evidence of the world we do see. You can no more ask for this evidence than you can ask BB King to “give you his knowledge of playing a guitar”. There will never be scientific proof of any of this, because science is also stuck in the same five senses you are, and relies on these five senses only. Religion is literally “over it’s head”.

Life, Reality, & Perception

Life is like waking up early on a Christmas morning, and you see many presents, pretty blinking lights, beautiful colors, and are overwhelmed by the spectacular moment. Then you spot the “Big Box” with your name on it, and you dive in. The rest is history, right?

Not exactly. Actually, the rest is your future.

Fast forward.

You have been so fascinated with playing with this present (the life you experience with your five senses), that you have totally forgotten all the other presents under the tree. You are satisfied with the one, so much so that the others have disappeared altogether.

The hidden knowledge of the other presents was never completely forgotten. This is actually the gnawing sensation that there is “something else” that motivates people to seek out ways to “figure this out”, or find out what is missing, and find it. This is religion. The pursuit of ‘answers’ to these “questions”.

The practice of religion causes you to see these other presents again. Those that study hard will not only see the presents others can no longer see, but can start to open them, and play with them. They are not visible to those that will not stop looking at the first box. Naturally, those looking only at the “first Big Box they open” will think those that are talking about the world beyond the five senses are nuts.  However, those that are using the other parts of their brain will not exactly care what anyone thinks about it.

So don’t be offended when they try to share their new toys with you. They are trying to wake you up.

“You’re focused on one small spot of reality…so much so, and so fascinated with it that you have to “wake up” to the realization that you are focusing on just one spot of an entire painting. Religion is training you to look somewhere else, and though it’s hard to look away, you pretty much have to sooner or later.”

-Peace

Something to help those that debate atheist on social sites

This is an explanation of the argument you are up against, and a simple answer to it. May it get you kicked out of as many social media debate groups as it has me. =) But remember, our job is to deliver the message, and that you should expect it, if indeed you have done your job. Nothing screams “win” in a debate group formed by atheist more than being kicked off their site. After all, they can’t have someone around that makes their argument look as foolish as they are.

“A fool hath said in his heart, there is no God” (Psalms 14:1 KJV)

“Believers” ?

This will be short.

Argumentum ad logicam (argument to logic)

This is the fallacy that undermines all debates between theist, and athiest. The term, “believers” is misleading. Atheist assume people can only believe there is a God, but can’t possibly know there is a God. This assumption, and it’s fallacy is described here:

Argumentum ad logicam (argument to logic). This is the fallacy of assuming that something is false simply because a proof or argument that someone has offered for it is invalid; this reasoning is fallacious because there may be another proof or argument that successfully supports the proposition. This fallacy often appears in the context of a straw man argument.
www.csun.edu/~dgw61315/fallacies.html#Argumentum%20ad%20logicam

I do not “believe” in gravity. I have knowledge of gravity. The fallacy is committed when the atheist assumes there is no evidence, when in fact there are other evidences they have not, or will not consider, or more importantly, are unaware of.
So they argue with the assumption that the evidence does not exist.

I most often describe this logical fallacy as “If God showed up at your house, but will not show up at my house, then God does not exist”. This is usually followed by the only argument I have ever seen from any atheist, which is,” There is no evidence. If you say there is, then hand it over”.

This is also a logical fallacy, in that while inanimate objects ideed can be “handed over”, God has the ability to make choices.

The argument that God can be forced to show up at your house, or lab of your choice…or even forced to pose for a photo, is not logical either. The request that God be handed over, is not logical. The request for the evidence you have, is a request for God to show up in front of them immediately. This request can only be made to God, the only one that is capable of delivering the evidence. The assumption that God can’t exist because He can’t be handed over, is the Argumentum ad logicam… the assumption is made that no evidence is available, when in fact, God has delivered it to many.
-Peace

Are Atheist Delusional?

Note: [The use of the term “atheist” is not used, or intended to be used as a blanket statement.  All atheist are not the same.  This excerpt from one of my books is from a chapter on certain atheist types]

In debates with these atheist, I have heard the term “delusional” used to describe theist.
Ironically, the word better fits the atheist, by definition.

Definition, in psychiatry: delusion

[Psychiatry. a fixed false belief that is resistant to reason or confrontation with actual fact]

Most atheist pitch the same tired speech…”there’s no evidence!”, like a broken record. Any attempt at all, or confrontation by theist to actually discuss their view will be resisted… just as the definition of delusion states.

Confrontation by theist will usually be met with a few imaginary rules, that they have made up (in their mind) to avoid the confrontation. Some atheist will cite logical fallacies, when the direct question that challenges the statement made by them doesn’t actually qualify as a fallacy.

Most atheist want to censor, and omit evidence types by claiming existence of another imaginary rule…one that omits all evidence types except one.

There is evidence for theism. There are also several different types of evidences.
[see scientism]
Scientism:

[Unlike the use of the scientific method as only one mode of reaching knowledge, scientism claims that science alone can render truth about the world and reality. Scientism’s single-minded adherence to only the empirical, or testable, makes it a strictly scientific worldview, in much the same way that a Protestant fundamentalism that rejects science can be seen as a strictly religious worldview. Scientism sees it necessary to do away with most, if not all, metaphysical, philosophical, and religious claims, as the truths they proclaim cannot be apprehended by the scientific method. In essence, scientism sees science as the absolute and only justifiable access to the truth]

The problem with this is obvious. This debate is about a deity that has the ability to transcend time, and space…but most importantly has the ability to make choices.

Atheist ask for empirical evidence to be “handed to them” by the theist. This is only logical when debating inanimate objects. Inanimate objects do not have a choice, and can actually be “handed over”.

Empirical evidence has been given by God to those that ask for it with a certain attitude. Why would God give anything to someone mocking His name? The point remains, the only one that can and does “hand out” empirical evidence of God is God…I can’t hand anyone God.

As the definition of delusion states, this stance resist reason, and logic.

Atheism is full of circular reasoning, and double standard. Just as the definition of delusion states, there is no evidence at all to support the belief that “God is a myth”, and there is no reasonable argument for that belief.

When I say “reasonable”, I mean again by definition. What is reasonable, and/or the most probable, given the evidence presented. Atheist most often state that there is no evidence at all to support a belief in God. This is yet another false statement, that supports this stance as delusional, again by definition. Lets face it, there is evidence for God’s existence, whether anyone accepts it or not, (or as the definition of delusion states, whether anyone is resistant to reason or confrontation with these facts, or evidences… or not).

In other words, there is enough evidence to support the very large number of people’s claim to knowledge of a deity. Is it more probable to assume God doesn’t exist, given the testimony of so many that He does? The reason I state this is obvious. Testimony is evidence, and most atheist claim there is “no evidence”…Which brings me to this point…

These statements are true, and are direct confrontations for the points atheist most often infer:

1)Evidence can be empirical without being reviewed by anyone at all, period.
2)There is empirical evidence that supports the existence of God, whether anyone sees it or not.
3) There doesn’t have to be any empirical evidence at all in order for God to exist.
4) Empirical evidence can exist without being available to everyone. {the color blue is a good example}
5)There exist documented evidence types, such as historical, and archaeological, that support many Biblical accounts, and corroborate the eyewitness testimony of the Biblical writers.
[This in turn has lead many intelligent, logical thinking people to the conclusion that belief in a God is more probable than not. While many historians and scientist agree that there is sufficient evidence to make this determination, many atheist still insist that there is “no evidence at all”…again, as the definition of delusion states, they will resist any confirmation of these facts]
6) Eyewitness testimony is a valid form of evidence.

Atheist often claim that personal experience is not acceptable as an evidence type, or adequate for determination of reality. Ironically, any evidence at all they ask for will have to be experienced personally.

Things exist, such as mental telepathy, clairvoyance, and many other perfectly valid realities that science will never examine evidences of. For instance, what is termed “near death experience”, could be an actual death experience. Whether it is or is not can not be determined by the scientific method. Science would have absolutely nothing to base a study on. The atheist’ answer to this is interesting. They will cite experiments that record brain activity “during” an event, then without any evidence at all, claim that the brain caused the event. This brings me to the last point I will make in this installment:

In any discussion or debate, points of truth have to be established and agreed on by both parties…or there is no discussion.

Atheist often infer the points they make, instead of actually making a point.

This again allows them to avoid any confrontation of the point, and therefore avoid the questioning of it. The reason is obvious. If they were to answer any direct question that confronts their point (inferred or stated), it would expose a double standard. This in turn will derail any attempt at discussion, and again, as the definition of delusion states, avoid a confrontation. Here is an example of one of these inferences:

Statement: “personal experience isn’t enough to determine existence of God”
This infers that it is not possible for anyone to know for a fact that someone, or something exist by personal experience alone. Yet these same atheist know for a fact their mother exist, and I doubt they have had her examined at a lab.

My point is….atheist will not make an actual point.

My opinion is that they do not have one, and they are delusional.

Peace