What is your "favorite" Xian argument used against non-theists?

[frostymama]

Which one is the most over-used illogical argument that gets thrown at you? Share the ones that make you shake your head in disbelief the 357th time you have heard it, burst out in peals of laughter, or think "Aw how cute. They think they will win".

The 2 that I get the most are Pascal's wager and the Liar, Lunatic, Lord arguments.

Anyone else have favorites?

[Captain Pedantic]

Personally, I'm rather fond of those creationists who say "But evolution is just a theory" and "If we came from monkeys, why are there still monkeys?" and genuinely think they're clever for saying such things.

[Walter_Mitty]

That to understand the bible I need to take into account the context as well as the allegorical meanings. Literalists are much easier to deal with.

[Rhea]

The Argument from Incredulity

"How can the world be this complex and be guided by physics? It must be divinely guided. How else could it happen?"

:eek:

[The Naked Mage]

[quote]All of teh Darwenists think taht we came from MONKEYS LOOOOOOOOOL<hr></blockquote>

[quote]Why do you hate Jesus?!<hr></blockquote>

[quote]If you can't tell me how the universe got started I am right by default.<hr></blockquote>

[quote]Athiests(sic) just don't want to be held accountable for their actions.<hr></blockquote>

[quote]God MUST be real because if the earth were any closer or further away from the sun we would all be dead.<hr></blockquote>

[quote]Plus Nature is full of real purdy things, and that just SCREAMS "Creator"!<hr></blockquote>

<img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" />

[Darwin's Finch]

Argument from Incredulity (II)

Theist, with awestruck expression, gestures toward the horizon and says, "How do you explain all of this?!?".

[Kosh]

"Jesus fullfilled over 300 prophecies in the OT!"

:rolleyes:

[Bible Humper]

[quote] God MUST be real because if the earth were any closer or further away from the sun we would all be dead. <hr></blockquote>

Oh shit, I've never run into this one! I guess that they are also amazed at how the branches of the trees bend just right to intercept the bases of the stems of all the leaves!

If the branch was even an inch or two off, most of those leaves would have fallen to the ground!

Praise God!

[Bible Humper]

As for the OP, my personal favourite(don't drop the "u", ya silly Yankee! ;) ) is the Free Will argument.

Anyone who has endured more than a few of my threads and posts already knows that! :D

[Janaya]

How do you know that God exists?

'Cause the Bible says so.

How do you know that the Bible is right?

'Cause God said so.

And how do you know that he said that?

It's in the Bible.

That argument is circular.

No it's not 'cause it's the TRUTH. And besides God wouldn't lie.

<img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" /> <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" /> <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" />

[SanDiegoAtheist]

Anything by CS Lewis.

I'm frankly amazed at how often Christians seem to think of him as one of the great writer/philosophers like Plato or Descartes. The very invocation of his name attached to an argument seems to be expected to strike fear into the opponent.

In point of fact, in my opinion he couldn't reason his way out of a paper bag. Great rhetoric, nice analogies, some good childrens books (yes, I actually LIKED Narnia) - no disciplined philosophy though.

Lord, Liar, Lunatic is my absolute favorite - mostly, because even though it's a false trilemma, I have absolutely NO problem with fitting the Jesus of the Gospels - as viewed from a 20th century perspective, and with knowledge of how cult leaders act and recruit - into either the Liar or Lunatic category...of course, Christians don't like me very much when I compare Jesus to Jim Jones or "Do" of the Heaven's Gate cult...but if the shoe fits...

Cheers,

The San Diego Atheist

[MadMordigan]

The only one that makes sense to me is the Arguement from Personal Experience. Not the 'I felt a warm fuzzy feeling when such and such happened', but the honest to goodness 'God spoke to me and told me to believe in him'.

[I ate Pascal's Wafer]

Well, obviously Pascal's wager is my personal favorit.

Some others are: "you just haven't asked Jesus into your heart." When I say that I have and nothing happened they say, "you just weren't sincere enough. Besides, you closed your heart and Jesus can't get in."

How do you explain the natural beauty of the world around us?

Evolution is just a theory, so that means that it's false, so that must mean that creationism is true, and creationism requires a creator.

And finally, any argument from personal experience where the person says they know in their heart God exists because they felt God.

-Nick

[Amen-Moses]

The tornado in a junkyard one. Of course that is just a very bad argument against evolution but they seem to think that makes it a valid argument in favour of god(s). <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" />

Amen-Moses

[Heathen Dawn]

Ayatullah Khomeini (rahimahullah) demonstrated the wisdom of Allah: Allah created deserts only where there are no people.

[Sephiroth]

1. Arguntum ad Monkeyum: WAH!! I descended from no filthy monkey, if I did, why are there still monkeys!

2. (tied) Argumentum ad C.S. Lewis: Wah!! Read C.S. Lewis' books and you'll change your mind (yeah right).

2. (tied) Pascal's Wager.

Those arguments used to be funny, now I just roll my eyes.

[ November 12, 2002: Message edited by: Sephiroth ]</p>

[Walter_Mitty]

While we're at it:

The Bible contains numerous historical facts. These facts continue to be discovered today by biblical archeologists. Therefore, God exists.

Makes me want to beat them over the head with a copy of Homer's Illiad and Odyssey since it too is a mixture of FACT and FICTION!

[ November 12, 2002: Message edited by: Bibliophile ]</p>

[Walter_Mitty]

Also: The argument from Lee Strobel.

:p

[Uzzah]

Argumentum ad antiquitatem - "It's survived for 2,000 years, so it can't be wrong.

Argumentum ad numerum - "Millions of people can't be wrong!"

and of course...to me...the most used argument against me...

Argumentum ad ignorantiam - "You can't prove my god doesn't exist, so he does!"

::sigh::

Uzzah

[Uzzah]

[quote]Originally posted by Bibliophile:
<strong>Also: The argument from Lee Strobel.

:p </strong><hr></blockquote>

I love for people to try and use Strobel against me...I have a little bright red book entitled "Challenging the Verdict" waiting on thier butts. :)

Uzzah

[JerryM]

Let's not forget the ever-popular Moral Argument--that without God as the author of morality we wouldn't know right from wrong. It's not even an evidentiary argument and it's been discussed and refuted ad infinitem, but it still gets dragged up.

[Devilnaut]

Mine would have to be the Ontological Argument:

1. God is perfect by definition
2. It is more perfect to exist in reality than to not exist in reality
~3. God exists.


Not just because of the blatant silliness, but mainly because it seems to have given a great number of people such a hard time :D

[Biff the unclean]

Twice today I've been hit with 'the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics (actually only half the second law…the one and three quarters law of thermodynamics) says evolution is a fraud which means that God is real'…and it's not even lunch time yet.

[GeoTheo]

[quote]Originally posted by MadMordigan:
<strong>The only one that makes sense to me is the Arguement from Personal Experience. Not the 'I felt a warm fuzzy feeling when such and such happened', but the honest to goodness 'God spoke to me and told me to believe in him'.</strong><hr></blockquote>

That's kind of the way it is with me. If feel like God speaks to me in a sense. But somtimes I think I might be imagining it. The thing is I always feel God is trying to lead me to do things that are consistent with the Bible and Christianity. I feel that I have had this influence in my life from a young age. The thing with arguments from personal experience is that it only has the power to convince the person that has the experience.
But assuming people are honest about their experience, I find them compelling. For example I had a friend who was an Atheist that became a born again Christian. He was an engineer who graduated from Brown University on a full academic scholarship. He was also a two time All American in Football in high school and Set records at Brown in tackling and later had a short stint with the jets. Here is a Guy that seemed to have everything. He was a tremendous physical specimen and also practically a genius with an IQ of 175.
So, if belief in God is a crutch he seemed not to need it. One day he converted to Christianity. He said he had a dream where God was talking to him. He was in this place he had never been before.
He remembered the dream but didn't know what to make of it. A few days later he found himself at the physical location the dream took place in and became convinced God had really talked to him in the dream. Assuming this Guy is not lying I find the argument compelling. Perhaps there really is no physical proof that can be pointed to as conclusive evidence for the existence of God. A person with an IQ of 175 should be able to recognize that. Perhaps God speaking to him in a dream is the only way he could be convinced. The thing I wonder about is whether God honors people who believe in him for seemingly less conclusive reasons, like you see in arguments for His existence that continue to be shown to be flawed in these forums.

[SanDiegoAtheist]

Geo:

Of course, this begs the question of:

"What about the people having 'personal experiences' within other religions?"

I've known some pretty bright Buddhists for example.

If there is a 'reality' behind the personal experiences - in other words, that a personal experience of the kind you describe are as a result of a REAL contact with some form of divine being, AND that this divine being imports to you information of some sort that leads you to (or supports you in) your religion - shouldn't ALL people experience these types of 'personal experiences' in the same way?

If not, why?

Of course, I have found it quite interesting that in the last year or two they've found that by electromagnetically stimulating areas of the brain, they can induce these types of 'personal experiences' - the feeling of being one with the divine (however, always interpreted and filtered through what they already BELIEVE to be the divine). I find this information answers the questions above quite well - better, in fact, than any supernatural explanation that has come to my attention.

Is it not more reasonable to hypothesize that these types of 'experiences' are in fact, simply aspects of the way our brain works in certain situations, and that it is OUR expectations of them that color them and lead to them 'confirming' whatever religious bias had already been present?

Cheers,

The San Diego Atheist

[Biff the unclean]

Geo, I've an IQ of 173 and can tell you this from experience...there are more "A" holes in Mensa believing more asinine fairy tales than you can shake a stick at.
IQ is no antidote for religious BS

[ November 13, 2002: Message edited by: Biff the unclean ]</p>

[Proctors_Gambit]

Oh God, so many awful arguments coming back to me.

One of my favourites is when they stick their chin in the air and 'remind' me that although the tombs of Muhammad and Buddha are full, Jesus' Tomb is empty
BECAUSE HE'S ALIVE!!!!!!!!!!
etc.
-Gambit

[Amen-Moses]

[quote]Originally posted by Proctors_Gambit:
One of my favourites is when they stick their chin in the air and 'remind' me that although the tombs of Muhammad and Buddha are full, Jesus' Tomb is empty
BECAUSE HE'S ALIVE!!!!!!!!!!
<hr></blockquote>

Just ask them "which tomb of Jesus?", the one in Saudi, India, Cornwall, France or Jerusalem? (or even if you want get really wild Japan!)

Amen-Moses

[ajm51987]

I have gotten

"I don't think you can truly understand untill you accept Jesus"

[Anderson]

Why did an omnibenevolent God create a massive flood and kill most things: "People were forgetting the way of God. He needed to start over, make some improvements."

I'd say, "Wouldn't he have seen that coming if he was a God?"

"I'm strong in my faith, and you can't make me throw that away over a debate."
(LALALALALALA, can't hear you, LALALA.)

[Undercurrent]

I'm personally fond of, "all bulls are male, therefore god exists," or "men have penises, women have vaginas, therefore god exists."

Poor Eternal.

m.

[Wyz_sub10]

1. "I know because I just know."

2. "The bible says so."

3. "There is so much that science cannot explain."

[Uzi9mm]

"Atheists are slaves of Satan"
What a load of bullshit, God ain't real, neither is Satan...

Heck, why don't I just go and claim they are slaves of Cow Pat?

<img src="graemlins/notworthy.gif" border="0" alt="[Not Worthy]" /> <img src="graemlins/notworthy.gif" border="0" alt="[Not Worthy]" /> <img src="graemlins/notworthy.gif" border="0" alt="[Not Worthy]" />

[SanDiegoAtheist]

[quote]Originally posted by ajm51987:
<strong>I have gotten

"I don't think you can truly understand untill you accept Jesus"</strong><hr></blockquote>

Reply - "Yes, and I can't understand heroin addiction until I've been dependent on opium either."

Cheers,

The San Diego Atheist

[frostymama]

Another favorite of mine "You never were a True Christian (tm) because there is no such thing as an ex-Christian. Once you feel the presence of God in your life you just can't walk away."

The above comment is even more annoying when it comes from someone who has been "born again" for less than 6 months and/or can't even keep children's Bible stories straight (much less grasp the finer points of doctrine). It is impossible to have an inteligent debate with someone when they start off with "You know, back in the days when Moses put all of those critters on the Ark..." :rolleyes:

[ November 14, 2002: Message edited by: frostymama ]</p>

[Dargo]

Read Josh McDowell. He used to be an atheist just like you.

Over 500 people saw the resurected Jesus!

Many people have tried to prove the Bible wrong. In the end they have either become Christians or had to admit failure.

Time and time again historians and archeologists have proven the truth of the Bible. Christianity is based on historical facts. All other religions are based on myths.

[Hobbs]

[quote]Originally posted by Biff the unclean:
<strong>Geo, I've an IQ of 173 and can tell you this from experience...there are more "A" holes in Mensa believing more asinine fairy tales than you can shake a stick at.
IQ is no antidote for religious BS

[ November 13, 2002: Message edited by: Biff the unclean ]</strong><hr></blockquote>

If you have such a high IQ, why did you have to edit your post? Wouldn't you have gotten it right the first time, smarty-pants?

So, what you say is bunk!

Therefore, God exists! :p

[Biff the unclean]

Rats, you caught me. A high IQ means never having to say you're sorry you made a typo.

At least I didn't say that I was really good looking (like the hero in Geo's story) and still rejected god claims.

[Mediancat]

I always like, "But aren't you afraid you'll end up in hell?"

If I don't believe in god or heaven, what makes them think I believe in hell?

I've never actually had the trilemma thrown at me; my favorite response to Pascal's Wager is "but what if the coin lands on edge? Does that mean the agnostics are right?"

No, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense, but it usually confuses them enough that I can get my way clear of the argument.

Rob aka Mediancat

Giles: "It's a reliquary. Used to house items of religious significance, most commonly a finger or some other body part from a saint."
Buffy: "Note to self: religion, freaky."

[Marruk]

I've got this one a lot in high school.

"Isn't it lonely without jesus by your side?"

[atheist_in_foxhole]

My favorite: The tomb is empty! <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" />

[ November 15, 2002: Message edited by: atheist_in_foxhole ]</p>

[Captain Pedantic]

The liar, lord, lunatic argument is a good one, mostly because there are actually other options.

1) Jesus, as described in the Bible, didn't exist. Everything written about this character is therefore fiction.

2) The guy did exist, but wasn't actually divine. He merely got that reputation by having the people who came to him for some street-healing actually get better. And by being a bit of a rebel and getting quite a reputation for himself. A sort of historical game of Chinese whispers.

(Charismatic street-healers were actually quite popular in Israel in those days - a sort of medical entertainment. There were few actual doctors about, if any)

3) The story is half-factual, and we can't say which half (but the bit with the demons turning into pigs is probably not factual). Some of the things written about this guy Joshua may have been true, but we don't know which ones.

[NOGO]

The ones from personal experience really get to me for example the one from GeoTheo above. Add to that all the talk about modern day miracles.

[quote]
GeoTheo
But assuming people are honest about their experience, I find them compelling. For example I had a friend who was an Atheist that became a born again Christian. He was an engineer who graduated from Brown University on a full academic scholarship. He was also a two time All American in Football in high school and Set records at Brown in tackling and later had a short stint with the jets. Here is a Guy that seemed to have everything. He was a tremendous physical specimen and also practically a genius with an IQ of 175.
<hr></blockquote>

IQ is one thing but what about his emotional stability? People who are emotionally unstable will believe anything.

GetTheo do you believe that only Christians have similar experiences?

Itsn't strange that the Bible is the word of God, God's REVELATION to man, Jesus teh Son of God came down do earth to give the message personally and yet some people need some thing as fanciful as a dream to get hitched.

I would say that what your friend experienced was brewing for a long time and that the dream was just fuzzy excuse to make the jump.

If such a dream happened to me it would not make a difference. Why? Because it would be set against all the evidence which tells me that Christianity is a hoax.

Your friend is not a liar; he just needed to believe.

[gsx1138]

I've had enlightening personal experiences as a Wiccan so the stories of the Goddess and the God must be true. :rolleyes:
While half of that is true, the only thing that personal experience gives you is personal experience. It doesn't give you the ability to tell someone what they believe/disbelieve is wrong because they don't have enough faith. Christians wouldn't be so bad if they just kept to them damn selves.

As an ex-minister I often used the arm sweeping action and pointed to the horizon saying, "Can all this be a cosmic accident?" My logic :rolleyes: would include the, because Jesus said so, well it's in the Bible, the Bible is the word of God, because the Bible says so argument. Man, I irritate myself when I remember how I used to be as a christian.

[Jagged]

[quote] Read Josh McDowell. He used to be an atheist just like you. <hr></blockquote>

I am so sick of Josh McFuckingDowell. The man has an ego the size of Detroit. I've seen him speak. Like the best fish stories, his personal "testimony" gets better and better with each telling. And people in the church think he's some kind of god. The only thing he's really good at is promoting himself.

[Lunawalk]

My favorite is I dont know God did it in reponse to the flood or any absurd story in the bible. :banghead: It a way of not answering your question.

[Petetsi]

I have gotten this more than a few times:

“Have you found Jesus?”

Now I respond with a look of sincere concern:

“Why is he missing?”

[Rational BAC]

Dragged this sucker thread up from Christmas past didn't we?

OK ---whatever floats your boat works for me.

[punta]

two of the more bizzare theist arguments i encounter are:

1)the argument from atheist anger...

after calmly refuting some theistic claims the theist responds with "why are you so angry?"

2)the argument from atheism...

after refuting theistic claims the theist responds with "if God doesn't exist why are you putting so much work into denying him then?"

[sharon45]

Originally posted by Biff the unclean
Geo, I've an IQ of 173 and can tell you this from experience...there are more "A" holes in Mensa believing more asinine fairy tales than you can shake a stick at.
IQ is no antidote for religious BS

[ November 13, 2002: Message edited by: Biff the unclean ]</p> This is true in that a high IQ does not have to mean that person is so very smart, more like, they have that much greater a potential to be smart.

Also, being of a great intelligence doesn't necessarily mean that person has that much wisdom. Furthermore, many of a high intelligence far too often, take their intellect for granted, unintentionally allowing themselves vulnerable to being greatly mistaken.

On the OP, my 'favorite' arguement, is in their constant insistence saying how 'god' is so all powerful, all loving, and all knowing, yet, (me being, of what I would be very surprised in having even an average IQ), I realize even without any bibles to find fault with, whatever created this universe, world(s), and lifeforms, is far the opposite of the widely accepted descriptions for a 'god'.

[scombrid]

Originally posted by punta
two of the more bizzare theist arguments i encounter are:

1)the argument from atheist anger...

after calmly refuting some theistic claims the theist responds with "why are you so angry?"

2)the argument from atheism...

after refuting theistic claims the theist responds with "if God doesn't exist why are you putting so much work into denying him then?"


AAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I get these on message boards frequently. Usually message boards that have nothing to do with religion. Some joker starts a testify'n and a preach'n and is usually calmly refuted. Then the atheist is accused of being angry and "attacking" the Christians. It's okay for them to preach or jump into a thread regarding science and tell us the evolution is a lie, but we're supposed to sit back and listen to them preach without comment.

In real life Pascal's Wager and Incredulity are the most 'arguments'.

The argument from McDowell and Stroebel are up there these days.

[Adora]

Probably the Argument from popularity. Then again, this is used across everything in the universe people don't want to change. And I'm supposing in this by "Favourite" you mean "Most loathed in all the world".

[Katarzyna]

The most mind-boggling one I've come across is: You can't be an atheist, because the word theist is a part of the word atheist, and since you're using the word theist, you're admitting a god exists.

I've first heard that one years ago, and I must say, I still don't have a good response to it.

Kat

[jafosei]

The most mind-boggling one I've come across is: You can't be an atheist, because the word theist is a part of the word atheist, and since you're using the word theist, you're admitting a god exists.

I've first heard that one years ago, and I must say, I still don't have a good response to it.

Possible response: by that logic, I can't perform an illegal act, since the word 'legal' is part of the word 'illegal', and by calling an action illegal, we would be declaring it legal. So if I strike you now, that action will be legal.

Can also be used with immoral/amoral.

[Godless Wonder]

The argument that goes: "The rational mind is incapable of understanding the spiritual world. I know Christianity doesn't make sense, it doesn't have to make sense. It's true, but you can't reason your way to the truth, you have to use your inner spiritual senses to find the truth, and suppress your rational thoughts."

Oh, puke.

The consequence of the above is of course there is nothing which can change the mind of a person who believes the above garbage, because they have "found" a "truth" which is "beyond the reach of reason," and any argument you might try to use against them will necessarily be based in rational thought, and therefore automatically invalid.

[MonkeyMan]

My definite favourite is the appeal to popularity:

"Billions of believers CAN'T be wrong! Praise the Lord / Allah!!"

To which I usually reply:

"Gazillions of blowflies CAN'T be wrong: SHIT TASTES GOOOOD!!"
:p


Runner-up (actually a non-sequitur but who cares :D):

"Proof that God created us is that mankind is the dominant species on Earth! Hallelujah!!"

Reply:

"Cockroaches are way more resistant than we are, therefore God must be a cockroach!"

:D

[Infidelettante]

"The whole world divides time according to the birth of Jesus! B.C. before Jesus and A.D. after Jesus. If Jesus didn't exist there would be no time!"

Now argue against that.

JT

[Fr8monkey]

Originally posted by Infidelettante
"The whole world divides time according to the birth of Jesus! B.C. before Jesus and A.D. after Jesus. If Jesus didn't exist there would be no time!"

Now argue against that.

JT
Well, let's look at the calander. Yup, says so right here June, July (And other months) Roman gods DO exist. Wait, there's Monday, Thursday, Friday! That proves that Odin is God and that the Vikings had it right! Judiasm, Islam, Shinto, Hindu, etc. all have different calanders so they must be right too?

Anyway, on to more pressing business. The one that makes me want to :banghead: is, "Your so closed minded, besides, God said it; I beleive it; That settles it!" AAAAUUUUUGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!! Kill me now!!

[naltariel]

Well, I am a former Christian. My most hated argument is : You're blinded by "wordly" philosophy.

:rolleyes:

However, people who claims to have listened to God doesn't mean they're emotionally unstable of needs therapy/medication. There are a lot of criterias to be categorized as schizophrenic, having religious experience is not one of it unless it's accompanied by other symptoms.

[Plognark]

First:

"Gazillions of blowflies CAN'T be wrong: SHIT TASTES GOOOOD!!"

Which almost made me spew coffee out my nose!
:notworthy well said! :D

I've gotten the anger one a lot, because, frankly, I give in to getting angry. Finally I came up with a good response that got them to leave me alone (this was a case where I really didn't feel like discussing it)

"Why are you so angry? Who hurt you in the past to make you turn from god?"

"All of you stupid deluded s***heads oppressing my beliefs and trying to convert me! That's what makes me mad! F*** OFF!"
:rolleyes:

Perhaps not the best retort, but WOW was it cathartic!

The most common one I see is the 'personal experience' one, probably because it's the hardest to refute for the illogical assumptions it actually contains.

Oddly enough, most of what I get is "I don't want to talk about it or argue about it or anything. My beliefs are set, so just leave me alone."
to which I usually reply
"Then stop bringing it up and trying to convert me!! Even little children know to stop sticking their fingers in an electrical socket the second or third time they get zapped!!"
:cool:

[ElectEngr]

When some screamin' fundi tried to convert me with some bulls[censored] "facts", I responded, "Let me get back to you on that. I'm not that familiar with what you said."

He came back with,
"I thought you were suppose to be opened minded. Why are you being so closed minded? Gawd has surely hardened your heart to his inspired truths."


Just because I didn't jump up and say Praise Jebus, I'm a f[censored] up sinner and I want to be saved.
:banghead: :banghead: :banghead:


[edit to add...yeah, I've heard the If we evolved from monkeys one, to which I respnd. "If we didn't evolve from apes, why do we still spank the monkey".

Later,
ElectEngr

[Mathetes]

"I've studied the Bible for years and I have never found any contradictions."

Makes me want to cry for the future of mankind.

[scombrid]

all the fulfilled profecies

[TheRealityOfMan]

Even when I was a Christian, I was less than impressed by the C.S. Lewis argument (bad, mad or son of god). Not only did I also see that there were many other options available, I also knew that Lewis himself exposes this argument in his allegorical The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe story.

If you remember, Lucy happens upon an old wardrobe that leads her to the land of Narnia and she is trying to convince her brothers and sister that she has been there. Obviously they think she is slightly crazy and just upset about things, naturally they do not believe she has actually been to a fantasy land. They take this issue to the house hold owner, the Professor. He asks them if they think Lucy is actually mad or wicked or something and they say no to this. He then says that unless they hear anything new to the contrary, they logically must conclude that she is telling the truth. The Professor then complains about the lack of decent logic being taught in schools.

The next time any fairly normal person tells me they have been to the land of Narnia (or have had an encounter with Christ), I suppose I logically should believe them.

[JusticeMachine]

Question:

Do you all actively seek out theists to torment or is it the other way aroung?

[scombrid]

Originally posted by JusticeMachine
Question:

Do you all actively seek out theists to torment or is it the other way aroung?

They're the ones with "The Great Commision" I think it's called. The evangelicals are called to annoy the rest of us. Like the guy that approached me at Kmart one day out of the blue and asked "Where do you go to church?". One day I'll learn to lie when somebody asks that. I know what follows the answer "I don't".

[NonHomogenized]

Originally posted by JusticeMachine
Question:

Do you all actively seek out theists to torment or is it the other way aroung?

While I don't claim to be representative of every atheist, or even every non-theist here, I think my answer is, at least, similar to most, so I'll give my experience.

I do not seek to torment theists, either actively or passively. I also expect that most theists do not intentionally seek out atheists to torment, either actively or passively.

However, there is a small portion of the population who are convinced that they have the Truth (tm), and that everyone else is, therefore, at best wrong, and at worst, evil. Usually both.

Such people seek out not only atheists to witness to/annoy/etc, but theists as well, even, sometimes, theists with similar beliefs to their own. These people, I think, are the ones doing any tormenting (and until far less than 400 years ago, that "torment" included torture). Admittedly, I often toy with them, but I can hardly be said to torment them the way they do to so many people.