How many mistakes have Atheists made?

Question

Following are examples of mistakes I've seen atheists make when dialoguing with Christians. They are important to know for both sides so better dialogue might take place. First of all, the atheist must realize that making these mistakes lessens his credibility with a Christian and does not help his cause. Second, the Christian should know these errors so he can identify them during a conversation and, hopefully, not commit them himself.

Number one is: Atheists often challenge the theist to prove God’s existence only within the confines of science.

Science has served humanity well. Through it, we have discovered countless natural laws of the universe and use that knowledge to make our lives easier in every area of our existence. But to limit a theist's proofs to the confines of what the atheist demands is terribly one-sided.

To a Christian, there are experiences that science and logic cannot explain. The atheist needs to recognize that we have experiences that are life-changing. No mere psychological set of theories explains the changes in our lives. So please, don't mock them. Can science nail down all that exists in mind, body, and soul? No. Can it quantify the beauty of a sunset, the cooing of a baby, or the love of a man and a woman? Science and logic have served us well, but they are not the ultimate truth to all things.
Of course, that does not mean we ignore science.

In fact, we use it in our proofs for God. But to limit the playing field to your set of rules is an improper way to start. It is mostly an attempt to initiate control and keep command of the conversation by setting the ground rules according to your criteria.

Though an atheist may not accept biblical evidence as support for God's existence, it does not negate the fact that the Bible is evidence. Whether or not the atheist wants to accept it is another matter.

Second will be: Name-calling and insults

Of course, this is obvious. I heard it said once that the man who strikes first admits his arguments have run out. In some of the discussions I've had with atheists, when I've made a valid point in logic, I have been insulted. To call someone a name is to attack the person and not the issue, and it closes the door to true discussion.

Third would be: Condescension

This is the most common of all mistakes I've encountered with atheists. I've been told by atheists that I'm an idiot for believing God and that if I were truly intelligent, I'd abandon my anachronistic thinking, etc. These comments do nothing to further discussion.


Fourth will be: Straw-man argumentation

Sometimes atheists will construct an argument against Christianity that does not reflect a true Christian position. For example, one atheist stated that the Trinity was illogical because three gods could not be one God. I had to correct him and show him that the Trinity is the doctrine that there is only one God in three persons, not three gods.


Other straw-man arguments deal with persons who claim to be Christians and act in an unchristian manner. A typical example is the white supremacist, who claims to be a Christian. When he does something which is against the Bible, his bad example is used to label all Christians.

So, how many more mistakes Atheists make?

Answer 1

I agree with you on most of the things you have mentioned. However I do not about the science bit. My opinion is that no matter how much one claims to be an expert in science that's still a drop in a bucket (more realistically like an ocean). With that drop both theists and atheists try to argue their "hypothesis". (At least theists admit we base our foundation on faith and builds everything around it but most atheists I have met here in Y!A claim their "beliefs" are based purely on logic - unfortunately logic based on at best incomplete picture).

Science itself is one of God's creations. every creation, should we comprehend for what it is, shouldn't contradict the very author of its own existence. Should we understand everything there is to know about science, I honestly believe it would lead us to the only conclusion that its existence is not possible without a creator.

Answer 2

You have made a very valid point. Though I am afraid that atheist's viewing this would use it against christians. I have never come across an atheist that could argue their point without the use of foul language. Of course at the same time before I became a christian, I found it difficult to conversate with christians without being condemned as a satan worshipper. I know many people, some who are good friends that don't exactly represent christians in the best light. One of those close friends says "if something is not honoring God directly, then it is of the devil, there is no in between" I can't help but make jest of this, because I believe there definetly is an in between. such as internet, does it straightforwardly honor God? No, but does it honor the devil, no. Many things can be manipulated to be either or. Another thing, christians also take things from other religions such as holidays and turn them into devil worship. By no means is everyother religion a blatant opposition called satanism, but to many christians out there, thats just what they call it. I apologize if this seems off track, but I'm merely offering mistakes on the christian side, who tend to think "we" are perfect.

Answer 3

Good, fine, whatever. However, shouldn't all your points also apply to Christians--just noting the first point you make, specifically, as follows:

If Christians want to accept belief that the Creation story is true, that's fine, and I don't have that much of a problem living and letting live. But there is no natural, physical evidence that supports it (or intelligent design, for that matter), so they shouldn't push for these so called "theories" to be taught in science classes, at the expense of or even side by side with evolution. And they shouldn't come on these pages and blast those who accept evolution because they a) can't fathom it or b) they can't accept the scientific evidence that supports it, because it is an explanation of the natural world and not something that relies on the supernatural.

Answer 4

I see. We atheists must give Christians leeway to prove God's existence outside the realm of science? Is this some supernatural, magical, spiritual, or heavenly way to prove things? If I ask anyone to prove something to me...wouldn't that be one-sided? How can a request be more than one-sided? Aren't you just in love with how intelligent you think you sound? You have not said one concrete thing here.

Yes I can quantify the beauty of a sunset. It's called aesthetics. Look it up. It's called appreciating beauty and feeling awe...it's purely biological. Ancient man took awe to be divine, but it's not. It's a human reaction to over-whelming stimulus.

What it comes right down to is that you are railing against the obvious fact that you are unable to prove your God's existence in any way whatsoever. You are feeling impotent and helpless and are trying to make atheists appear wrong for asking. But you Christians are the ones that believe in your God, so the proof lies with you. That you cannot prove it to us just reinforces how right we are.

This question was such a bore to read. This was not a list of mistakes, this was a rant about how you feel about being wrong. Nothing you have said here proves that you are right about anything. It looks like you have some issues to work through.

atheist

Answer 5

While your statements are reasonable, they are monopolized neither by atheist nor theists. Most people are not trained in the art of logic, and so they make leaps that are not supported by the evidence or reasoning.

Your reference to the Bible and personal experience as evidence are the only points with which I find disagreement.

An examination of the Bible shows that it was written for particular cultures. The "prophecies" that are cited in the New Testament as proof the Jesus was God' son are easily shown to be retro-fitted (made up to fulfill a prophecy) and draw on "prophecies" that no Jew would ever think referred to anything that resembled a messiah. If anything, the Bible's compilation suggests it is a book pulled together by the powerful in order to retain power. A book so wrapped in human greed hardly can claim credibility as a source of information about providence.

You describe an experience and assume that it was a divine intervention, discounting natural causes that can explain them. This is neither parsimonious nor without cultural influence.

Unparsimonious: There are more likely explanations that do not require you to jump to a theist interpretation of events. As a matter of fact, by assuming "god," you rule out any search for what happened.

Culture bound: Had you grown up in another culture, you would have likely had a similar experience and yet decided it came from either a different deity or from a different source of inspiration (e.g., Buddhist enlightenment).

I applaud your use of logic as a source of discovering which arguments make sense, but you've not used your own clear thinking to address the topics that are at the core of your beliefs.

^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^

Answer 6

you should be thankful that many atheists restrict their demands for the existence of the supernatural to scientific proof. what i mean by this is that most atheist will not deny that they cannot disprove the existence of gods and the supernatural using a scientific argument and methodology. if the atheists on the other hand only demanded that proof for gods and the supernatural should stand up in a court of law, then theists would really be in trouble. you see there is not even any solid circumstantial evidence for spookiness. i'm afraid any honest jury would return the verdict that there are no gods because the defence could offer no evidence other than anecdotes and hearsay. whereas, the prosecution could offer clearly provable and tangible evidence for their case. no if i were you i would stick to the scientific argument, at least your opponents who use a scientific criteria cannot definitively prove the non-existence of the supernatural, even if they can disprove all of the metaphysical mumbo jumbo that goes with it such as creationism and the fallibility of holy texts.

Answer 7

So you are telling me I should believe in the bible because the bible say so else you are a fool as mentioned in the bible? Now isn't that a mistake which is a combination of all the "mistakes" you had listed?

Number one : Christians had challenged the atheist to disprove god's existence within the confines of YOUR blind faith.

Number Two : Christians had used the bible and its' words for name-calling and insults and justify it because the bible says so.

Number Three : Christians told atheists that they are fools for not believing in their god and if they are truly intelligent they will know what was written in the bible is the whole truth.

Fourth : theist will construct an argument against atheist that does not reflect reality at all. For example, most christians states atheists have no moral because they have no god. Other christians staw-man argumentation would by the use of power hungry communists (perverted edition) which does something against humanity in general and generalising it as atheists behaviour.

So how many more mistakes had christians made?

(Therefore, sweep your own backyard before you claim others being unkept)

Answer 8

Peace be to you.. An atheist shouldn't initiate disbelieving in God in basic terms using fact "Christianity" and unusual techniques like the Trinity are incorrect... it is the activity and the very inner nature of the guy or woman, that he searches for the guy who created Him. technology does no longer disprove God, technology disproves stupid claims made by utilising authors of the Bible. If the guy who claims that he "is familiar with" that God does not exist does not attempt to seek for the certainty, then he might desire to be finally held responsible for this negligence. God says in the Holy Qu'ran: [6:5] when you consider that they rejected the certainty whilst it got here to them, they have incurred the leads to their heedlessness. additionally... [6:10] Messengers till now you have been ridiculed. that's people who mocked them who suffered the leads to their ridiculing. So conversing Islamic, Allah isn't a deity like Jesus, or the different idols they go mutually with the writer. he's barely the writer and have ordered messengers to ask the persons to the certainty: the popularity of the writer using fact the only one deserving to be worshiped. it is the character of each and every man or woman that he wonders approximately who created him, however the enticements of existence tension him to distort God's be conscious and propagate falsehood whilst concealing the certainty knowingly. [fifty 9:23] he's the single GOD; there is not any different god beside Him. The King, the main Sacred, the Peace, the main committed, the very superb, the Almighty, the main useful, the main Dignified. GOD be glorified; a great way above having companions. [fifty 9:24] he's the single GOD; the writer, the Initiator, the clothier. To Him belong the main fascinating names. Glorifying Him is each and every little thing in the heavens and the earth. he's the Almighty, maximum sensible. [22:seventy 3] O human beings, here's a parable it is needed to contemplate heavily: the idols you positioned up beside GOD can on no account create a fly, whether they banded mutually to attain this. apart from, if the fly steals something from them, they can't recuperate it; susceptible is the pursuer and the pursued. [4:80 two] Why do they no longer study the Quran heavily? If it have been from different than GOD, they could have modern-day in it diverse contradictions. and Allah is familiar with superb.

Answer 9

It is impossible to attack God... think of it this way.. for each branch of religion and the sticks that stick out of each branch is a horocrux. ( the thing that makes Voldemort immortal in Harry Potter). For an atheist to prove god doesnt exist, they would have to attack religion at about a couple thousand angles with all relativley well thought out logical ideas.... 10000 freaking supercomputers couldnt do that.. because religion will evolve along with society

Answer 10

Are you willing to accept the mistakes christians make when dealing with atheists? Seriously, you've only tried to point out what atheists should do when trying to make their points to christians. What about what christians should do? This is just another attempt to force atheists to see things your way.