Why atheists arguments are invalid

[Bruno_Schulz]

** There are countles efforts of atheists to ridicule Christianity.
Let’s as one of many, mention George H. Smith; by his followers called “A Contemporary Philosopher” who really wrote such baloney in his book: ATHEISM - THE CASE AGAINST GOD – like (shortened):

(1.) Christianity must destroy reason before introduce faith
(2.) destroy happiness before introduce salvation
(3.) is profoundly anti-pleasure especially in the area of sex
(4.) Sexual pleasure is the most intense form of pleasure
(5.) To deny oneself pleasure, or to convince oneself that pleasure is evil…
*
Any Christian will ask; what on earth is he talking about?
It spoils nothing to say that this is B*****t.

(1.)
Church keeps pointing out and not only St. Paul said, that it takes a lot of reason to understand believe (the reason, atheists don’t have). Jesus said in Matthew 13,11: "…knowledge of the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven has been granted to you,
BUT TO THEM IT HAS NOT BEEN GRANTED.”
(2.)
It’s terribly laughable to presume; Christians wouldn’t have happiness. One thing for sure: A single Christian has a lot more of PURE happiness then all atheists together even ever could have. Would Jesus have made water into wine on the wedding of Kana if He and his people had no happiness?!
(3.)
I as many, after having suffered so much (murdering of my son etc) still have pleasure, for we have God with us. And no atheist can imagine, how pleasurable is it, that we Christians are NEVER alone! Isn’t it remarkable, that for instance in Germany, most happy and funny people live in the Catholic centers along the Cologne-Mainz Rhine-line with it’s great carnivals?
(4.)
Sex? :lol: never Christians where against sex. But loving sex, not dirty sex. Dirty sex ruins all and brings a lot of sorrow and misery over the human race - Aids for one thing, masses of divorces and more. Obliviously to atheists sex is all they have if they call sex “the most intense form of pleasure”. Poor things! To Christians other things count a lot more, like having a loving partner, dear children and grandchildren, loving families, and most pleasurable of all: HAVING GOD! and never to be alone.
(5)
ALL (!) Saints praised God for the pleasures they have in “knowing” and “having” God, the beauty of nature, the overjoyed knowledge of being eternally with God after they leave here.
Let atheists go to a Monastery to see the joy they have, if they don’t believe us. Did they ever see the joy and pleasure and happiness in the eyes of Mother Teresa?!

**

 

[goofyjim]

Some atheists arguments are invalid just as some Christians arguments are invalid. But we shouldn’t generalize. We do not have exclusive rights to valid statements.

 

[Bruno_Schulz]

**how come you found this New Thread and answered only 2 minutes after it was opened?

Yes, we do not have exclusive rights to valid statements.
but
the New Testament together with the RCC has exclusive rights to valid statements.

Thanks heavens there is one authorized organization founded by Jesus Christ, who has exclusive rights to valid statements that are absolute.**

 

[goofyjim]

how come you found this New Thread and answered only 2 minutes after it was opened?

Yes, we do not have exclusive rights to valid statements.
**but **
the New Testament together with the RCC has exclusive rights to valid statements.

Thanks heavens there is one authorized organization founded by Jesus Christ, who has exclusive rights to valid statements that are absolute.

I fight injustice. From any angle. Not all atheists are out to destroy christianity. That is a blatant misrepresentation. But not everything done “in the name of God” really considers God at all. There can be absolute statements outside the Church as well.

 

[Sailor_Kenshin]

Even Socrates, a pagan, knew the concept of a human soul, and spoke of sin ‘staining’ or killing that soul.

God ever calls to us. And gives us free will not to listen.

 

[twb1621]

I fight injustice. From any angle. Not all atheists are out to destroy christianity. That is a blatant misrepresentation. But not everything done “in the name of God” really considers God at all. There can be absolute statements outside the Church as well.

You don’t list what you believe in regard to God or Christianity, but you reflect openness of His existance. Would you mind saying where you stand in regard to your beliefs?

 

[Bruno_Schulz]

**

I fight injustice

Oh Dear. All say that. Nobody would ever even think not to fight injustice. Even Hitler thought he did, so did Satan himself, for all of them thought they where just.

That’s why we are so thankful for the one and only real just word - that of Jesus Christ.
We never go wrong, if that is our foundation for all our thinking and doing.

Not all atheists are out to destroy Christianity.

Show us a single one who says: “The word of Jesus Christ is absolutely right”

OK – some of them might not want to “destroy Christianity” for they are clever enough to realize, that Jesus promised us, that the hell will never overcome the Church Jesus founded, nor Christianity. They know that here is an absolute secure stronghold that overcame all of histories besetments; beginning with Rome as capital of savage persecution of Christians – now capital of Christianity. But they keep trying to ridicule Christianity.

Often enough though, atheists and other nonbelievers had exposed themselves to ridicule, (as we had many examples here in CAF) so the more intelligent of them, got a bit more careful in their practicing badmouth ecections. First reason: They can’t prove their theses of “there is no God”.

But not everything done “in the name of God” really considers God at all. There can be absolute statements outside the Church as well

True! Most warlords said they do their murdering in the name of God, but they have the devil as partner. No believing Christian would do so. And of course millions of statements outside the church are plain truth too. For instance when my wife just calls me for supper; I truly take this for plain truth and won’t resist – switch the Computer off and follow.
Your objections don’t disprove that the Word of God is the one and only truth ALLONE.

**

 

[crowonsnow]

Though they can be fun, entertain, and are generally good for cerebral development, arguments such as these are dopey. The only valid arguments take place outside the confines of text and speech. You know, those things we do.

If you watch someone help the proverbial little old lady across the street, said person could be of many beliefs. We really only know what a person believes by what he does. There is no other valid standard. That’s worth repeating: There is no other valid standard. But hey, let’s keep digging for that long lost Nazi manifesto proclaiming an abiding love of Judaism, so we can all change our minds about these folks and stop judging them by what they did. Okay?

And by all means lets continue discussing why plain-bellied sneetch arguments are invalid.

 

[Tony_Souza]

The idea that discussing ideas and having dialogue with people who have different beliefs is patently absurd. The previous poster said that one cannot know what someone believes by watching what they do, then promptly contradicted himself by saying it is the only way to know what people believe. The fact of the matter is that you can watch someone for a very long time, a lifetime even, and probably not know what they believe.

At work, no one would know I was a Catholic if I didn’t tell them. That is not because I don’t act morally, or do things I shouldn’t. It is simply because there is nothing I do on a day to day basis that has any bearing on my faith.

I have known many atheists who would have no problem helping a lady across the street. I have also known many Catholics, Protestants, Buddhists, Muslims, Hindus and Sikhs who would do the same thing.

Even if it was possible to know what someone believes by watching them, it would still be impossible to know why they believe as such. It would be impossible to persuade anyone about anything. Wouldn’t it be interesting if all our politicians tried to make laws without speaking a word, just by sign language or some other physical demonstration?

As Christians, we love our God, and our Church. We want to spread that love throughout the world, and instill all people with the same joy we have. It is true that we need to live our lives according to God’s will. No evangelization would be effective otherwise. But at some point we need to be able to explain and defend our faith using words. Saint Francis of Assisi said to preach the Gospel everywhere and to use words when necessary. That is the very point of these forums. I sincerely wonder why someone would participate if they did not think words could change hearts and minds.

 

[Bruno_Schulz]

**Oh we are used to atheists saying our arguments are dopey (hurrah a new word I learned). Dopey though where all atheists arguments I ever heard in those last 72 years of mine
A real clever one I still seek might be you can help me one day to find it, but you seem far away of it

If you watch someone help the proverbial little old lady across the street, said person could be of many beliefs. We really only know what a person believes by what he does.

Oh yes, I did ask that proverbial little old lady when she was on the other side – and I brought her back, for she didn’t even want to be on that other side
But otherwise you are right, and that’s what the bible tells us in Matthew 7,16-20. Thanks for reminding us on the Bible

But hey, let’s keep digging for that long lost Nazi manifesto proclaiming an abiding love of Judaism, so we can all change our minds about these folks and stop judging them by what they did. Okay?

Oh Dear, what on earth are you talking about. Nazis hated and destroyed some 6 Mio Jews! Have you had some German beer too much? Nazis hated anyone who was not a Nazi. So many RC-Priests have been murdered in Concentration camps too and anybody who dared to say a word against this devil Hitler. Which school did you go? But don’t despair – just ask me

lets continue discussing why plain-bellied sneetch arguments are invalid.

What’s all that buffoonery about. What do you intend. Make us all laugh? We are all happy – don’t really need your ill kind of exhilaration. But obviously you are wanted here, else you hadn’t written over 630 posts here
OK then, but don’t expect me again to waist my time on suchlike fooleries.
**

 

[Bruno_Schulz]

We mentioned Matthew Mt 7,20 in previous post, and our brother in the Lord said:
„ no one would know I was a Catholic if I didn’t tell them. That is not because I don’t act morally, or do things I shouldn’t. It is simply because there is nothing I do on a day to day basis that has any bearing on my faith.“

We never can tell just by his right doing, if anyone is living in God not. Many who do very religious, might actually be more interested in money, sex, or pride than in God. Others we consider irreligious, might be more religious than we are. So let’s beware to judge on outer appearance. Let’s not judge at all.

The fruits of our live mentioned in Matthew 7,20 are much different ones. They are the fruits God sees. It’s obedience of God, obedience fort he word of God.

The word in Mt 7,20 is very helpful for every single one of us to recognize his very own relationship to God. Everybody himself knows his own thoughts, motives and wishes himself best - he knows if they and his doing (and not doing) matches Gods will.
Our neighbors and even our closest relatives do not know, neither do we know about them how their relationship to God is. It’s none of our biz either.
That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t care!

So why do we tell irreligious about the joy of God, the joy of living in believe? It is love! Purely love. Not caring is a lot easier indeed!
If we see somebody walking right into his death – wouldn’t we tear him back before he does next step?!

So Mat 7,20 is a great help to us, to find out for ourselves how good or bad our relationship to God is.

At work though, in our everyday surrounding, we ought to let people know, how strongly be we believe in God. This might be awkward if the people around are silly, but I do it continuously and believe me, if they aren’t complete nuts, most people appreciate this - if they believe in God or not. And – it really makes you feel satisfied in God. Just have a try.
**

 

[twb1621]

Though they can be fun, entertain, and are generally good for cerebral development, arguments such as these are dopey. The only valid arguments take place outside the confines of text and speech. You know, those things we do.

If you watch someone help the proverbial little old lady across the street, said person could be of many beliefs. We really only know what a person believes by what he does. There is no other valid standard. That’s worth repeating: There is no other valid standard. But hey, let’s keep digging for that long lost Nazi manifesto proclaiming an abiding love of Judaism, so we can all change our minds about these folks and stop judging them by what they did. Okay?

And by all means lets continue discussing why plain-bellied sneetch arguments are invalid.

Considering what you said and this is a written forum, why would you want to be here anyway? You sound as though you have no intention to take part in such a forum but write it in the forum? isn’t that dopey?

 

[Bruno_Schulz]

Dear Forums manager,

This really is a nuisance indeed
I did “contact the administrator” within the last year several times - all in vain.:
The administrator has specified that you can only edit messages for 20 minutes after you have posted. This limit has expired, so you must contact the administrator to make alterations on your message.
and I don’t see, WHY just 20 minutes ???
In my late Forum
Gott-Kirche-Glaube.isthier.de every registered authour could edid even after years!

up here in my previous post I detected just now another mistake I made:
It must not be:
We never can tell just by his right doing, if anyone is living in God not.
but:
We never can tell just by his right doing, if anyone is living in God or not.

 

[crowonsnow]

The previous poster said that one cannot know what someone believes by watching what they do, then promptly contradicted himself by saying it is the only way to know what people believe. The fact of the matter is that you can watch someone for a very long time, a lifetime even, and probably not know what they believe.

No. I said a person can be of various beliefs. But the only belief or beliefs we can be certain of about a given person are those we can document by observing what that person does. It’s simply the difference between what a person says and what a person does.

The fact is that if what a person thinks he believes is not manifest in his actions he doesn’t really believe it. That’s an easy conclusion to make, unless a person thinks his or her observations are less important than what a person is telling them in word.

At work, no one would know I was a Catholic if I didn’t tell them. That is not because I don’t act morally, or do things I shouldn’t. It is simply because there is nothing I do on a day to day basis that has any bearing on my faith.

I have known many atheists who would have no problem helping a lady across the street. I have also known many Catholics, Protestants, Buddhists, Muslims, Hindus and Sikhs who would do the same thing.

And that’s exactly my point. You’d judge that these people believe in helping a little old lady across a street. You’d also judge that to be moral act and that therefore that person is moral. You wouldn’t know if that person is atheist or theist. If you found out later that one was theist or atheist why would you change your opinion of that person? How have your observations changed? They haven’t. You’d just be acting on prejudice.

But I wouldn’t really know if you believed atheists or theists were immoral unless I could make further observations of your behavior. Despite what you may tell me you are thinking or thinking you believe, I can only make conclusions from what I observe about you. It’s that simple, lest I also act in prejudice.

Even if it was possible to know what someone believes by watching them, it would still be impossible to know why they believe as such. It would be impossible to persuade anyone about anything. Wouldn’t it be interesting if all our politicians tried to make laws without speaking a word, just by sign language or some other physical demonstration?

Yes. I’ve thought about that quite a bit, communication being a matter of observation and not speech or writing. Ultimately that’s what it is anyway. It’s just that many of us don’t know it because we’re poor observers, and as a result we are easily fooled.

 

[Sailor_Kenshin]

I like what Ann Coulter says about atheists and their catch-all responses to believers. (Paraphrased here):

Believer: Your time on the Stairmaster is up (or other equally neutral statement).
Atheist: (sneering) Oh, so you must believe in God.

 

[tomarin]

I like what Ann Coulter says about atheists and their catch-all responses to believers. (Paraphrased here):

Believer: Your time on the Stairmaster is up (or other equally neutral statement).
Atheist: (sneering) Oh, so you must believe in God.

I’m still having a hard time seeing Ann Coulter as a spokesperson for Christianity. (Then again, she did say we should convert everyone in the Middle East to Christianity by force, so I guess she’s a kind of spokesperson, just one who interprets Christianity in a way that I find strange and problematic.)

 

[Sailor_Kenshin]

What is it you find strange and problematic—the fact that she openly believes in God, or that she has a sense of humor?

 

[tomarin]

What is it you find strange and problematic—the fact that she openly believes in God, or that she has a sense of humor?

Okay. That’s one way of dealing with the discrepancy – she doesn’t really mean it. But if she doesn’t mean what she says, why take her seriously at all?

 

[Spock]

Considering what you said and this is a written forum, why would you want to be here anyway? You sound as though you have no intention to take part in such a forum but write it in the forum? isn’t that dopey?

I know this was not addressed to me, but I received the same question many times.

It is partially for the same reason that some Christians spend time of atheist boards: they are concerned about our fate, they want to save us from whatever hell they believe in. Well, guess what? We are concerned about you: here and now. We want to open your eyes, and allow you to lead a life which deals with actuality, and not worry about some afterlife.

Christians say they do it out of “love”. I would not use such a strong word, but I definitely feel sad to see this life wasted on rituals. When I sometimes peek into the “Moral Theology” forum, I become almost depressed to see the anguish of those posters who are worried about normal acts of life, who suffer from fear that they “soul” is in jeopardy. Which makes some posts on this forum quite ironic, when posters assert that we, atheists are here because we are “jealous of the happiness Christians”.

When I look at Christianty from the outside, I can see that many of you are very happy, and lead a full life. I also see many who suffer from being scared of the assumed consequences of their normal actions. It is a mixed bag. You can say that atheists have problems as well, and you would be right. But one thing is certain, when we worry about something, it is real. We are not scared of devils and demons. We are not scared of eternal damnation.

 

[Sailor_Kenshin]

Okay. That’s one way of dealing with the discrepancy – she doesn’t really mean it. But if she doesn’t mean what she says, why take her seriously at all?

She does solid research into liberal propaganda and blows their ‘arguments’ into shreds. You’re not required to like her style or even ‘get’ her sense of humor. I was just wondering.