How to Debate an Atheist

PJ Media ^ | September 22, 2017 | Edward Watson

[Raymond Pamintuan]

Atheism, the rejection of the possibility that “God” exists, has become the dominant thought amongst intellectuals in the past century and has been around longer than most people think. For over 2000 years, it was based on philosophical arguments that can roughly be summed up as the atheist saying, “I don’t know how ‘X’ came to be, but you can’t prove it came from God.” This mindset has been highly effective because it places the burden of proof on the theist to prove the positive of God’s existence, which, superficially, is impossible to do – because no evidence exists that provides “proof” that can be independently verified and repeated at a five-sigma (5σ) confidence level and above that God is real.

During the Age of Enlightenment in the 18th century, atheists were no longer content to use philosophical arguments and started using positive claims that basically said, “‘X’ proves God does not exist.”

Most recently, the highly influential New Atheism spearheaded by Dawkins, Harris, Dennett, and Hitchens has modified the positive arguments, but reinforced and justified a dangerous trend that started in the late 20th century that roughly states, “Because you do not accept that “X” proves God does not exist, you are not credible and must not be allowed to be in a position of influence over others.”

The New Atheism mindset has had an enormous effect among atheists in positions of power in academia: For the “thought crime” of believing God exists, theist scientists have actually been blocked from jobs and tenure, they have been prevented from getting their works funded or published, and many have actually been terminated from their jobs. One now sees university campuses where openly theist professors are becoming rarer by the year,

[Migraine]

been around longer than most people think

Yes, I'd say so. 1000 BC David was saying, "The fool has said in his heart, 'there is no God'".

[Rich21IE]

Debating an Atheist is a total waste of time.

[LittleBillyInfidel]

There’s no need to debate an atheist, because they are of the lowest intellectual form. To be an atheist, one cannot acknowledge that “he doesn’t know what he doesn’t know”. He cannot even wrap his mind around this simple concept.

[joshua c]

Atheists have religious beliefs. Negative religious beliefs.

In the world of numbers, they are not zero. They are negative one. Christians are number one.

So when a STATE official stops a citizen from expressing his religious beliefs, for example, a valedictorian, they are supporting one side against the other. They are not being neutral.

Atheism is the official STATE religion in contradiction of the US Constitution.

[sparklite2]

“I contend we are both atheists, I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.”
-————————Stephen F Roberts

[xzins]

A very long article. And involved.

Thanks for posting.

[Migraine]

Atheists cheat. They have more “yeah-buts” than the pages in War and Peace.
For instance: The Bible says in at least 55 places that God would scatter Israel around the world for their disobedience, but would bring them back to their land. Against all odds, He made that happen in 1948, and even resurrected their once-dead language, Hebrew.
But the atheist, not believing in miracles, says, “those prophecies don’t mean what you say they mean; anyway, they were written after an earlier regathering had already happened.”
So atheists reject good evidence.
From my perspective, though, I think such evidence is strong enough to be considered a seed planted. Maybe it will germinate; but I will not hold my breath.

[Yaelle]

From Dennis Prager “Believers in Gd have to explain His existence. Atheists have to explain everything else.” Love it.

[IronJack]

There are actually two ways.

1) Put the burden on them. Force them to prove that God does NOT exist.

2) Demure to the argument. And then say that it doesn't matter, because belief in God -- Faith -- is not arguable. That I BELIEVE God exists doesn't depend on whether He does or not. That accomplishes the same thing as 1, but renders their argument irrelevant.

[CptnObvious]

How to Debate an Atheist: PRAY BEFOREHAND.

Ask that you be a good Ambassador to God before him.

Ask that you present a love that he cannot refute because the Atheist sees love in you.

I believe this is how I went from being an Atheist to a Believer. Because peoplee were praying this and for my Salvation from the dead.

[demkicker]

Saving for later - thanks.

[Agamemnon]

An atheist has to be able to provide a deliberative reason for why he exists at all. By definition he must be his own creator, yet can't explain:

1. how he did it

2. why he did it

3. why he can't duplicate in a controlled lab what he was supposed to have designed and created himself in an uncontrolled environment all powered by his will and random chance in the first place.

Atheists are merely arrogant cartoons of internally self-contradictory "intellect."

Fact is that in truth there is no such thing as a atheist. An honest atheist will have to admit that he merely worships himself. He together with his elevated sense of self-worth is his own little god.

And how small minded and and intellectually impoverished is that powerless little "god."

FReegards!

[onedoug]

The believer in a moral God must account for one thing, unjust suffering, while the atheist must account for the existence of everything else. --attr GK Chesterson(?)

[ronniesgal]

why would you bother? Leave people to their own beliefs, and they will probably return the favor.

[PigRigger]

Aetheist have faith... Faith in one day man will be able to explain how matter appeared from nothing or was here eternally...

Both defy the laws governing our universe...

[CincyRichieRich]

1Peter 3:15; there really isn’t a case for debating non-believers; most will out debate you and an observer won’t be able to tell the difference between a fool and not a fool...love them into the Kingdom. It’s God’s job to work on their heart, not mine.

[PigRigger]

Than ask them to explain how the laws governing the physical world are so precise and unchanging... and why they are what they are...

[mairdie]

I beg to differ. I refuse to debate religion because I fear convincing someone to whom religion is a needed foundation. I have no fear of being an intellectual inferior to someone of religious beliefs, but I respect their rights to have those beliefs and expect them to respect my right not to. If they can’t respect another human being of differing beliefs, I feel sorry for them. But superior? Absurd.

[Redwood71]

The real problem with atheism is that they have faith only in things they cannot feel is perfect. So their life is flawed and expected to be so.

rwood