How to Convert an Atheist Part 2

	Duration: 06:52 minutes Upload Time: 07-04-18 18:06:59 User: FightingAtheist :::: Favorites :::: Top Videos of Day
Description: Part 1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_rqUsC2KsiI A genuinely flawless and consistent holy book True inerrancy is, so to speak, the holy grail of theism. Almost every religion claims their scripture is perfect, but none have actually met this exacting standard; I have yet to read a holy text entirely without error or self-contradiction. A book that was free of such problems would be circumstantial evidence in favor of the religion that possessed it, but not compelling, since this is still explicable as the result of purely human forces. A religion without internal disputes or factions It seems reasonable to expect that, if there existed a god that was interested in revealing itself to humanity and desired that we follow its commands, that god would write down whatever instructions it had to give us in a way that was only amenable to one interpretation. Thus, if a religion was true, we might expect that no factions or sects would form within it and all members of that religion would speak with one voice regarding ethical and theological issues. Why the alternative scenario should ever hold for an inspired religion is not clear. Did God intend to communicate his message clearly but failed to do so? However, since this could still be the result of human influence, it would only be circumstantial, not conclusive, evidence in favor of a given religion's truth. A religion whose followers have never committed or taken part in atrocities If a given religion's sacred text consistently promotes peace, compassion and nonviolence, and if that religion's history reflects that fact, that religion would look much more attractive. Historically, almost every religion that has ever had the power to do so has persecuted those who believed differently, and I do not think it likely that a morally good deity would allow his chosen faith's good name to be smeared by evil and fallible humans. The final category deals with things that would not convince me; none of the following would persuade me to rethink my position. To date, all the evidence I have ever seen presented for any religion falls into this category. Speaking in tongues or other pseudo-miracles To convince me, a miracle would have to be genuine, verifiable, and represent a real and inexplicable divergence from the ordinary. Anything that can be explained by peer pressure, the power of suggestion or the placebo effect does not count. Favorable coincidences or kind or courageous acts performed by human beings also do not meet this standard. (This post clearly illuminates the difference: "Biblical miracles aren't about accidents and people saying 'Whew that was close.' Biblical miracles are people raising their hands and telling something impossible to happen, and it happens.") Seeing the Virgin Mary in a water stain or Mother Teresa in a piece of pastry is not impressive. And faith healing or people being "slain in the Spirit" and toppling over, owes more to showmanship and the placebo effect used on eager-to-please individuals that have been worked up into highly excitable suggestible states. Now, if faith healers could restore severed limbs that would be convincing. People's conversion stories I'm not interested in the testimonials of people who converted to a religion, not even if they used to be atheists. Everyone has moments of weakness in which emotion overrides logic. Instead of telling me how fast a religion is growing, how much of a difference it's made in people's lives, or how devoted its converts are, let those converts explain what logic and evidence persuaded them to join in the first place. If they can't do this, their stories will not affect me. Any subjective experience Saying "I know God exists because I can feel him in my heart" or something similar will not affect me. Most arguments of this sort rest on the assumption that a person cannot have a completely convincing subjective experience and be mistaken regarding its cause, but a look at the diversity of world religions easily disproves this. Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists - members of all faiths claim to have had convincing subjective experiences of the truth of that faith. Obviously, they cannot all be right. Why should an atheist accept any one of these testimonies as more valid than any other? The Bible Code or other numerological feats Using the same algorithms employed by the Bible Code numerologists, skeptics have been able to find assassinations and other historical events "predicted" in Moby Dick, War and Peace and other works of fiction that don't claim divine inspiration, so don't expect it to impress me. Creationism of any sort http://www.ebonmusings.org/atheism/theistguide.html
Comments
drahyden ::: Favorites But you have to understand, that people a lot of people want to read the bible literal, creationist most of all but also all the "God hates FAgs" protestants. Catholisism understand this and encorage their folowers to interprete the bible, but evangelist dont, People claim it is the Word of God, and by taking it literal they eliminate all possible mistakes that men could commit. 07-09-29 07:57:47 __________________________________________________
JesusismyShepherd ::: Favorites The Bible has error to the 21 century man, but remember, it was written by man, so errors like quotes that aren't word for word are going to happen, but that's not what God wants us to study, He wants us to look at the teaching. The fig tree withers at different times in Matthew and Mark, but both have Jesus' teaching of faith, which is the whole point. As I see it, this only gets people off track. 07-09-29 01:09:33 __________________________________________________
JesusismyShepherd ::: Favorites Would you believe if perhaps a miracle was done like in the book of Acts? shepherdserve(DOT)org/special_reports/daniel_main(DOT)htm 07-09-29 01:02:54 __________________________________________________
sarichyboy ::: Favorites The fucking Evil Torah the old testament The Book of EVIL 07-09-28 01:48:16 __________________________________________________
Arayziel ::: Favorites Cthulhu fhtagn, Cthulhu fhtagn! Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'yleh wgah'nagl fhtagn! 07-09-26 21:25:43 __________________________________________________
Arayziel ::: Favorites Cthulhu fhtagn, Cthulhu fhtagn! Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'yleh wgah'nagl fhtagn! 07-09-26 21:25:41 __________________________________________________
GoetzimRegen ::: Favorites hmm, there can not exist any logical system without a minimum of sentence that are neither true or false - in mathematics they are called axiom. so in an ironic way, all books cannot be flawless and consistent. but statements of the sentences of the axioms which could be generated with the set, must be consistent and flawless. 07-09-25 20:47:24 __________________________________________________
bryeinsteinmc2 ::: Favorites LOL and more LOL why almost All atheist never mention the evidence of the big bang? i wonder why most atheist do not talk about physics? and why do most of them always talk more about biology? Probably because they lack the knowledge in physics. 07-09-24 23:02:03 __________________________________________________
tamouh2 ::: Favorites I'd also believe more in God if I can see a proof of an angel, deamon, devil or spirits. Doesn't have to be hard, a real genuine proof that something out of the ordinary (and without anyone influence) happens. Like a table at my house move by itself and other sane and logical people around me see it happen. I've heard alot of stories like that, but never experienced one. And for most, the ppl who told those stories weren't reliable in my opinion. 07-09-24 02:20:59 __________________________________________________
dmokri ::: Favorites I do not have to see some thing with my eyes in order to believe some thing. The beauty of my christianity is that even if I can not see some thing but when I pray onto God, I always get my respnses. If you believe in astrologers then you shuld believe in three wise men who predicted the birth of Jesus right? 07-09-23 20:06:09 __________________________________________________