I Am Not An Atheist

I think your statements are just an embarrassment anyway. You need to get your own thinking straight before you start criticising Lewis . If you are in atheist you believe we are the product of an guarded forces so therefore they can be no meaning as you don't even know whether you're thinking is rational@LeopoldBloom

@Speedyman I have done my own thinking, in fact, I was raised in a religious home, and had never heard of atheism when I realized that the "God" explanation was unnecessary. I even thought that I was the first person in history to come up with this, so don't give me the "you are only repeating stuff you've heard" nonsense. You're only accusing me of what you probably do yourself, repeating what your pastor tells you or what you see on YouTube.

You don't know what you're thinking is rational either, because even if God exists, you can't prove that you're his authorized spokesman or that you understand what God wants. You're basing your entire philosophy on the assumption that you're an authority. You could have completely misunderstood everything you think you know, and you can't prove otherwise.

Lewis is a crappy apologist anyway. If you want to read actual Christian philosophers, try William Lane Craig or Cornelius van Til. I don't accept their conclusions either, but their positions are 100x more well thought out than Lewis'.

Your thinking is totally irrational and comes from a reaction against your own religious upbringing. If you had any sense you would know that actually CS Lewis is a very good apologist which is the reason he was listening to by thousands and continues to be a best seller. The fact that you probably don't understand Lewis anyway and you continue to make these silly assumptions about other people which actually apply to yourself . One who is totally guilty of misunderstanding@LeopoldBloom

@Speedyman Insults don't make an argument, Speedy. And the argument from popularity is a logical fallacy. What makes Lewis a bad apologist is his Trilemma. He says Jesus was either a liar, a madman, or was telling the truth. In fact, the situation is more complex. Lewis fails to include the possibilities of the people who wrote down what Jesus supposedly said being liars or madmen, or simply mistaken. You can't just assume that everything in the Bible was recorded correctly just because you want it to be. Lewis never claims to be a Presuppositionalist. So his argument is poorly thought out.

By the way, I enjoyed my religious upbringing and the positive attention I received as a result.

It is your argument of course which is not thought out. As I have said it is an interesting the people who do not fail to insult other people, have a very thin skin is when the truth is rammed home to them. The problem you have is that the gospels do not appear as though they were written by liars or madman but I people who honestly believe what they were saying. Lawyers and far greater minds who have examined the gospels have declared them to be true. It is the atheistic position that is poorly thought out. The fact that I believe that the new Testament is correctly recorded is based on logical research not mere assumption. Atheism is based on the fallacy of wishful thinking of trying to wish away a God who is inconvenient to you . The reasons for atheism or moral and emotional, not intellectual, as atheist like to fool themselves@LeopoldBloom

@Speedyman It's possible for people to have a sincere, honest belief, yet be wrong. For example, the 9/11 hijackers.

Anyone who examines the gospels and "declares them to be true" is talking out of their ass. There aren't any other contemporary records with which to verify them, for example, Roman records of a man who was crucified and rose from the dead. That would have been as unusual back then as it would be today. I'm sure there was an itinerant first century Judean rabbi named Yeshua who was crucified for some infraction, but the stories of miracles he supposedly performed were fabricated. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, which is completely lacking here. Just because someone says something happened, doesn't mean it did, and the gospels were written between 30 and 80 years after the supposed events.

The only reason you believe this claptrap is because the thought of nonexistence after your death terrifies you for some reason, so you've latched onto this story that reassures you that you'll spend eternity in the happy place with your magical imaginary friend. It also gives you an excuse to feel superior to people who disagree with you. Not that all religious people are like that, but many are, and you're a prime example of the arrogant jerks who have made religion a bloodbath throughout history.

Are you totally without knowledge at all? The fact that the gospels are the best attested of any ancient documents seem to have escaped you . The fact that they are better attested than Caesar's Gaelic wars or Tacitus, for example, both of which are used by historians as valuable documents, should surely give them weight even to a mind like yours . You have absolutely no evidence to suggest that the miracles were fabricated. All you can merely do is pile on a load of unfounded accusations on people who believe which of course anyone who knows anything can laugh at . Your arguments are becoming more and more pathetic.
The reason I believe is not because I fear death like you deluded peopke seem to want to believe, because you've got to sneer at belief and have something to sneer at , it's because I have studied carefully and believe these things to be true . Many of the educated people have done the same. The problem is people like you desperately try and find reasons for your unbelief . We had the usual thing when atheists start talking about our beliefs as claptrap we know that they haven't investigated them properly and also they haven't understood what the issues are . You might win the approval of your fellow atheists who are similarly lacking in understanding, but you do not impress anyone who has actually studied the issues involved and come to a conclusion that the new Testament is a valuable historical and theological document@LeopoldBloom

@Speedyman [quote]The fact that the gospels are the best attested of any ancient documents seem to have escaped you .[/quote]
Complete rubbish, just like almost everything you post here. Try doing a bit of real research.

[quote]You might win the approval of your fellow atheists who are similarly lacking in understanding, but you do not impress anyone who has actually studied the issues involved and come to a conclusion that the new Testament is a valuable historical and theological document[/quote]
I have studied the bible and come to the logical conclusion that it's nothing more than a jumble of myths and superstition interspersed with BS. You'd know that if you had actually studied it yourself.

I have done research and people who know what they are talking about agree that the new Testament is the best textually attested ancient document. Unfortunately to prejudiced people like you this means nothing as you are totally unwilling to accept facts and are stuck in your own delusion @suzie1960

@Speedyman [quote] people who know what they are talking about [/quote]
They would be people who also buy into that BS of course.

[quote]people like you this means nothing as you are totally unwilling to accept facts and are stuck in your own delusion [/quote]
You must be looking in a mirror.

Oh yawn. You are so boringly crass. Try some education. @suzie1960

@Speedyman If I'm so boring, why do you feel compelled to keep responding? Is it due to some sort of obsession?

Judging from the standard of your posts here, I expect my education greatly exceeds yours.

Whether or not your education exceeds mine, which I doubt, the quality of your non-arguments show that you don't know what on earth you're talking about. @suzie1960

@Speedyman LOL! Try reading what you write.

I've just written that you don't know what you're talking about and you don't. Any informed person will tell you that. @suzie1960

@Speedyman Only uninformed people such as you are unable to understand my arguments. Educated and informed people have no difficulty.

@suzie1960 I commend you on your patience, but Speedy has been thoroughly indoctrinated.

It's impossible to discuss Biblical scholarship with people like him who don't know the difference between that and Bible study. He's like the Muslims who think they understand the Quran because they've managed to memorize it.

Sorry mate that you have been thoroughly indoctrinated with the daft things you say . It's always amuses me how you like this couple other people indoctrinated where is it is quite obvious it is you have been indoctrinated in believing something that couldn't possibly be that nothing created something. If that is not indoctrination then I don't know what is. I do realise that the indoctrination argument is one of your tired arguments that atheists constantly put forward to hide with their own lack of argument. Your argument revealed that you have not clue about Bible scholarship and you do not know what you're talking about and to hide your own ignorance you have to come forward with these pathetic statements . @LeopoldBloom

@Speedyman While you entire argument consists of questioning the education and intelligence of anyone who doesn't buy into your BS. You have [b]NEVER[/b] produced any evidence to support your claims, you've just repeatedly lied by saying you have. Go on, prove me wrong by posting a link to the evidence you've previously posted right now.

The fact I have produced arguments but you have produced none to substantiate your non-claims appears to have escaped you or have you never learn to read@suzie1960

@Speedyman Where have you presented logical arguments to support your claims? All I've seen you post are childish insults.

Please learn to read girl@suzie1960

@Speedyman You have produced what you think are arguments.

At least they are arguments which is more than you have produced. There is no argument for atheism as it is a completely illogical delusion. The delusion is illustrated by a whole load of people getting hot under the collar with a God they don't believe it@QuixoticSoul

@Speedyman No, they aren't. Generally they're just unsupported assertions. Often they're simply fallacies. You've made lots of either here, but nothing that actually looks like an argument.