1. Make statements like this: "Of course there's a God, and deep down inside you know that it's true."
Why will I stop listening to anything you have to say when you say that? Because it shows that you make blanket statements about what I know/do not know without any evidence for your claim whatsoever, which to me, shows that you confuse knowledge with assumptions.
I do not know there is a god, as much as maybe you need to think I do.
2. Say things like 'God's word is written on your heart, whether you like it or not'.
Why will I stop listening to anything you have to say when you say that? Because there is nothing written on my heart. My heart is an organ that pumps blood throughout my body and I can assure you, no one has been in there writing on it. Yes, I know it is a metaphor, but if you truly believe I have a soul that is going to burn forever then stop speaking in metaphor and get to the point.
Also, the whole 'whether you like it or not' part is childish. Saying that something is true 'whether you like it or not' is like stomping your foot and pouting because someone doesn't believe what you say.
3. Tell me I am an immoral, lying, thieving, murderer because your god told you so.
Why will I stop listening to anything you have to say when you say that? Because you do not know me. I am none of those things and to say that because someone ever once told a lie and therefore they are a liar, period, is to also say that if someone ever told the truth then they are a truth teller, period. You can not have it both ways and it makes you sound stupid when you try.
Also, acting like a bigoted ass because your holy book says it's ok, still doesn't make it ok.
4. Make statements like this: "So God in his sovereignity chooses to save whom He will and those he has not chosen will not be saved. No one chooses God. All those who are saved are saved because God has called them, not the other way round. To say created beings like us have the ability to choose where we spend eternity is false and decieving. There is no such thing as free will. The thing is we do not know who is chosen or who is not, only God knows."
Why will I stop listening to anything you have to say when you say that? Because you've just told me that you worship an asshole who chooses some and burns others for no other reason than he feels like it. Thanks for saving me the time of considering your god.
5. Tell me that evolution is a lie.
Why will I stop listening to anything you have to say when you say that? Because it lets me know that you have no understanding of the subject whatsoever.
6. Tell me that evolution can not be true because it would mean that your god didn't create the world.
Why will I stop listening to anything you have to say when you say that? Because it shows me that you can not distinguish myth from truth and it also shows me that you worship a tiny little powerless god if all it takes is a myth to make him untrue.
7. Rename your website 'Atheist Central' then get pissed when atheists visit and tell them to go away, then remove the post as if it never happened.
Why will I stop listening to anything you have to say when you say that? Because you are Ray Comfort.
8. Talk to me about deities, angels, demons and spirits as if they are real entities.
Why will I stop listening to anything you have to say when you say that? Because there is not one single shred of evidence that it is true and you are showing me that you are credulous and might also believe in fairies and anything else that comes from myth. It also makes you sound like you live in a state of eternal Halloween in your head where goblins and such are actually real and roam around the earth.
9. Tell me about some healing that supposedly occurred as the direct result of your deity but for which, of course and per usual, you have no evidence for except your word or the word of someone who told you.
Why will I stop listening to anything you have to say when you say that? Because it demonstrates that you participate in magical thinking and that you do not understand that there are perfectly natural reasons why someone might get better from an illness, and that just because we do not always understand what these reasons are there is no reason to fill in the gap in our knowledge with a god. In other words, it tells me you really worship the god of the gaps of knowledge.
10. Tell me that you have proof for your deity and then tell me that so and so was a drunk, a drug addict, a wife beater, a _____________ (fill in the blank) and then he found god and god changed his life.
Why will I stop listening to anything you have to say when you say that? Because it shows me that you do not understand the meaning of the word proof. Someone changing their behavior can and does have a multitude of factors involved. There is no need to engage in a false dichotomy and believe that there was only one factor and that factor was some supernatural entity.
11. Tell me 'Oh, if you only saw the miracle that I saw' or some derivative of that such as 'In Timbuktu there was a man with no legs and people prayed and poof he had legs!!'.
Why will I stop listening to anything you have to say when you say that? Because it is hearsay and if I told you that I cut my arm off yesterday in my kitchen and then prayed and god magically reattached my arm as if it had never happened then you'd want proof. When I ask you for proof of your claims you have none yet can't understand why I don't believe you.
I'm sure there are more, but this was just what I came up with off the top of my head.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
I am still poking Ethan with a stick. I'm sure he'll miss the whole point. I am tired of "christians" asserting that atheists actually believe in God. He couldn't really believe that because a) the definition of atheist means no belief in God b) it's been explained over and over.
ReplyDeleteHe's deluded or lying. Either way he doesn't see how badly this reflects on his kind. I think in every new post I'll work in the statement that christians only pretend to believe in Jesus.
Milo,
ReplyDeletePlease poke as hard as possible. Leave a mark if you have to.
Hmm, I would add 'quoting scripture' to the list. That's a surefire way to get me to quit reading their posts, or listening to them. Somehow they can't understand that the fact that I'm atheist also means their holy book is at the same bookshelf as all the other so called holy books, right in the fiction, myths and other fairy tales section.
ReplyDeleteFirst proof that their God exists, then I'll consider the book that comes with that particular god.
Cp3,
ReplyDeleteI was remiss in forgetting that one.
Quoting scripture is perfectly ok if scripture is what you're discussing. However, if the quotes are meant as an authoritative statement that's supposed to be taken as self-evidently true or wise, they're useless unless accompanied by a scripturally independent explanation. Saying that statement a in book x of scripture is valid because statement b in book y confirms it is a non sequitur, because you have not explained why statement b is valid first. If you simply have faith that statement a or b are true because nothing you know or have experienced contradicts them, then it should be the honest thing to just say so, instead of begging the question by claiming an independent absolute standard of truth.
ReplyDeleteWhat? Calling people mean names makes them ignore you and not care what you have to say?
ReplyDeleteDANGIT! If I had known that, I'd have said something to Ray about it eons ago...
Rob, I know...isn't it odd how that works?
ReplyDeleteThis list is made of win.
ReplyDeleteNMT wins the internet for the day.
Yea !!! I won! I won !! :::does dance::
ReplyDeleteRe:#3
ReplyDeleteA man murdered his wife on Monday. On Tuesday he walked by 50 people and did not murder them. When he was brought to trial he told the judge that he was a not a murderer but a people-keep-alive-er because there were 50 people every day that he walked by and did not murder.
^^^^
ReplyDeleteI LOL everytime NMT murders somebody...
NaFa,
ReplyDeleteI was not referring to nmt personally, I was referring to the assertion that if one commits an offense and then commits the opposite of that offense it somehow negates the original offense.
“because someone ever once told a lie and therefore they are a liar, period, is to also say that if someone ever told the truth then they are a truth teller, period. You can not have it both ways and it makes you sound stupid when you try.”
If this is true then we should release all prisoners because certainly at times in their lives they did not steal, murder, rape, etc.
Any person with a rational notion of justice (christian, atheist or otherwise) would realize that this is incorrect.
I know that.
ReplyDeleteThe point is your analogy is grossly oversimplified.
First, there is, I'm sure you are aware a huge difference between telling a lie and killing. We can correct a lie, we can make-up for the wrong we did, it is not (except maybe in the most extreme examples you could think of) on the same level as murder. So, you're analogy makes no sense.
Secondly, any action a human being takes needs to be considered in context. Anybody with a rational notion of justice realizes this. Why did the person lie? Did the end justify the mean?
Even in a case such as killing? Is one who kills to protect the life of another a murderer? Is an accidental killing a mureder?
Maybe the guy's wife in your example was about to kill his kids. Maybe he made chicken for dinner and it wasn't cooked well enough and she died of simolnella.
And finally, even if a person lies, steals or murders for malicous reasons, it still holds true this does not make up the whole of who they are, just as ones good deeds do not make up the whole of who we are.
Let the punishment fit the crime. An infinite punishment for a finite crime is Not justice.
btw, I was serious when I said the way NMT murders makes me LOL...she totally kills like a girl!
"We can correct a lie, we can make-up for the wrong we did"
ReplyDelete- what about perjury? Say someone goes to jail for 20 years because I lie under oath in court, how is that corrected?
If someone steals your car tonight and gives it back in a month, should that person go to jail for theft?
"except maybe in the most extreme examples you could think of"
- ironically you use the most extreme example you could think of in number 2 :)
"Maybe the guy's wife in your example was about to kill his kids. Maybe he made chicken for dinner and it wasn't cooked well enough and she died of simolnella."
- next time I use an analogy I will include the most minute details :)
"And finally, even if a person lies, steals or murders for malicous reasons, it still holds true this does not make up the whole of who they are, just as ones good deeds do not make up the whole of who we are."
- agreed. I've lied and therefore am a liar, I'm not sure how this is a statement about the whole of who I am.
thanks for not completely stopping to listen to anything i have to say ;)
Nafa, I throw like a girl too.
ReplyDeleteMark,
What I was saying is that Comfort's 'Good Person' test makes no sense. In it, he asks if a person has ever told a lie and if the person answers yes then he tells them they are a liar.
To say that a person is a liar for the rest of their lives just because they once told a lie is to negate the rest of their actions throughout their lives over one incident.
"what about perjury? Say someone goes to jail for 20 years because I lie under oath in court, how is that corrected?"
ReplyDeleteIs murder generally equivalent or worse than lying?
"If someone steals your car tonight and gives it back in a month, should that person go to jail for theft?"
I didn't say people should not be punsihed. I said let the punishment fit the crime. Life is Not just this or that, black or white, a person is a liar or not a liar.
If someone steals my car they should be punished. If they give it back, that should be taken into consideration when the punishment is decided. But no matter what the punishment, it should not be eternal, and there is no reason to simply label this person a theif for the rest of there life once the punishment has been served.
"ironically you use the most extreme example you could think of in number 2 :)"
what #2?
"next time I use an analogy I will include the most minute details :)"
I don't see how those details are minute. There is big difference between pre-meditated homocide and self-defense. My point is your analogy, just like Christianity so often does, made blanketed over-simplied comments on human nature.
"I've lied and therefore am a liar, I'm not sure how this is a statement about the whole of who I am."
eh? That's exactly what Ray's trying to imply when he gives that stupid good person test.
"thanks for not completely stopping to listen to anything i have to say ;)"
Don't thank me. If I had half a brain in my head I would have ignored all your comments.
ReplyDelete"Maybe the guy's wife in your example was about to kill his kids. Maybe he made chicken for dinner and it wasn't cooked well enough and she died of simolnella."
that is an extreme example. I used the word murder, not accidentally kill.
the difference between lying and killing is beside the original point.
"That's exactly what Ray's trying to imply when he gives that stupid good person test. "
no, he's trying to show that we're guilty.
my original comment was to refute the assertion that that if a person commits an offense and then commits the opposite of that offense it somehow negates the original action, the degree of the offense is irrelevant.
you can have the last word if you so desire.
"the difference between lying and killing is beside the original point."
ReplyDeleteBut it's not if the Christian god sends both liars and murderers to the same Hell for eternity. Futhermore, he sends 'murderers-at-heart' to the same hell as actual murderers. This is in no sense justice, however, Christians will contiunally argue god is omni-just. And I often wonder how this sense of spiritual justice affects their view of justice in the real world.
"my original comment was to refute the assertion that that if a person commits an offense and then commits the opposite of that offense it somehow negates the original action, the degree of the offense is irrelevant."
You're right it doesn't, at least not entirely. But I don't think NMT was claiming it does. Her point was it's just as silly to label a person whom tells a lie as a 'liar' as it is to label one whom makes a true statement a 'truther'. Both are just parts of the whole which make us human. But Ray fails to take into account these realistic nuances and makes disingenous appeals to the emotion of guilt.
Nafa,
ReplyDeleteHer point was it's just as silly to label a person whom tells a lie as a 'liar' as it is to label one whom makes a true statement a 'truther'. Both are just parts of the whole which make us human.
Exactly.
And Mark, you understood that from the beginning.
When a theist tells you "Deep down you know you believe in god" respond with, "Deep down you know that's not true."
ReplyDeleteBTW, visit my blog, I debunk creationism:
http://aigbusted.blogspot.com
So I was recounting this conversation to my wife; she read it and told me I came off like a jerk (basically). After re-reading it I kind of agreed so I wanted to apologize.
ReplyDelete