I posted a couple of videos on the subject of Islam.
I suggested that atheism doesn’t believe truth exists.
Then I stumbled across this article which perfectly demonstrates that point.
As always, the comment section is open.
Let me know where I’m off-base.
If you like my blog even a little bit, then you should know I do Christian Comedy live shows! It’s all the faith and fun you read here, but on stage, it’s even more hilarious. Hire me for your next corporate bash, church event, or school function, and let’s make it a night of laughs with my unique brand of Christian Comedy!
Three Little Pigs in Shakespeare is available as a children’s book. Get the illustrated story based on my viral comedy routine from Amazon. Makes a great gift for the word-lovers in your life.
You gonna keep lurking forever or are you gonna join this exclusive clique?
Stop procrastinating. Click This.
10 Responses
Spartan, like many (most?) anti-theists, insists there is no such thing as an atheist worldview. In that article he was quite nasty about it, too. I think the problem with this is a matter of definition. They define worldview as a distorted view of reality as seen through a religious, mystical, or superstitious lens. They honestly believe themselves to be looking at things as they really are. They might even object to the use of “believe” in that sentence, insisting that it is not belief, it is just seeing what is.
Better informed philosophers, theologians, religious persons, and lexicographers define worldview differently:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/worldview
https://www.wordnik.com/words/worldview
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_view
In a nutshell, a worldview is “The overall perspective from which one sees and interprets the world.” This includes both conscious and sub-conscious presuppositions. It absolutely does include atheist points of view. The arguments about which worldview is more accurate are a completely separate matter. Atheism IS a worldview (or perhaps a collection of worldviews), and I have known atheists who were honest enough to admit it.
Conversations among people who apply different definitions of key terms often lead to strange and/or unsatisfactory results. Sometimes the parties do not realize they are using different definitions. Sometimes one or more parties are quite intentional and belligerent about their alternate definitions. Sometimes (as we have often seen among certain heathens) they refuse all attempts to define the terms, in which case we might ask whether we are trying to distribute pearls in the barnyard.
I’m willing to use literally any definition for any word, when trying to understand (and be understood by) a conversation partner.
Early in dialog with Ark, he asked (REPEATEDLY) what my God’s name is, and he wouldn’t accept that “God” has many names. Finally I told him to pick one, and Ark asked, “How about ‘Dick'”? Okay, sure, I said.
Ark thought that would end the conversation, but I rolled with it, in effort to demonstrate all the ways his ideas about “Yahweh” were immature and cartoonish. But ultimately, he was only interested in attempting to offend–not in mutual understanding.
As you say, sometimes we have to ask ourselves whether we’re wasting our time…
I don’t think you’re off base at all.
Long ago I came to the realization that absent the Lord and a keen awareness of people being made in the image of God, there really is no logical argument against terrorism. How can it be wrong to target groups of randomly evolved biological goo whose existence has no meaning? That is a chilling truth to confront, but absent some Christian values and a somewhat Christian world view, you lose your moral base on which to object.
I don’t think you are off base. The problem that I see in all of this is the atheists unwillingness to have a real discussion. They never answer a question directly, but instead argue around it and when you don’t back down the cursing, name calling and ultimately you getting kicked out results. Until they will allow their beliefs to be challenged(atheism is a belief system),which is what he argues must happen with everyone. I assume he is included in that statement, but probably not.
I actually agree that we must allow our beliefs to be challenged it is the only way we will really dig deep and find out why we believe what we have put our faith in. It is clear from the atheists that I know they are I willing to do that. They don’t have any idea of what Christianity is really all about and have no desire to find out.
You can’t have an open exchange of ideas if one party won’t engage and allow their position to be challenged. That is why you doing what you are doing is valuable. You at least try to get them to answer questions. You take a verbal beating for it, but you don’t back down and hopefully you encourage other Christians to not be afraid of intellectual discussion. We can win in that arena we just have to be willing to step in. It has encouraged me anyway
Hey John,
As a veteran of the first Gulf War, and son of a Marine who is a Vietnam Vet, I can say this guy’s first 8 paragraphs are dead on. His Sam Harris quote in the fifth paragraph is amiss – not because it is wrong – but because why would someone quote Sam Harris unless they were a militant Atheist. It would be like you quoting Billy Graham.
In paragraph nine however, dude shows his true colors. There is no “New Atheism”. There is only virulent haters of Christianity. Proven out by the fact that “atheists” almost always will never merely attack the obvious flaws and viciousness of the blood cult known as Islam*, but use it as a bridge to attack Christianity.
The truth that these “lovers of reason” fail to see is that only nations built upon one of two worldviews support the New Atheists ability to be “atheists”. Nations built on Communist Socialism, and nations built on Judaeo-Christian values. And in the first, one is commanded to worship the State as a god. They owe their very freedom to believe and attempt to “evangelize” others to the atheist worldview on the very Christianity they attack.
Kudos to you brother for taking on this fight. It seems about as rewarding and pleasant to me as hitting your mouth with a hammer…
* I feel the need to point out that MUSLIMS are people created in the image of God, and in desperate need of the saving blood of Jesus Christ. ISLAM is a blood-cult, and I believe that Allah, if not Satan himself, if definitely a high ranking Demon. But individual Muslims I have a heart for, and pray that they find a way out of bondage.
Good points here. Your final paragraph demonstrates the difference between the Christian worldview and Atheism. In practical terms, the difference between atheism and Islam is the atheists don’t have strong enough convictions to blow themselves up.
“Difference between Atheism and Islam: Atheists don’t have strong enough convictions to blow themselves up.”
Is that too long for a T-shirt?
😀
P.S. John Z’s “research” on the Exodus all came from A SINGLE ARTICLE. lol. I found it last year and asked him if those experts gave him permission to quote them out of context all over the internet. Real scientists don’t say things like “The Exodus Never Happened,” but Atheists who read JZ’s “research” walk away saying that.
I read a lot of stuff about the the Exodus after Windbag started making noise. Turns out, there are several different versions of the story. But “complete fiction” is not what any of the experts say.
I’m grateful to the Atheists for requiring me to look more closely at what I’ve been told. Turns out, some of my Bible teachers didn’t know everything about the Exodus!
And it turns out I’ve been lied to by Atheists ten times as often.