I Am No Longer an Atheist

by OnTheWayOut 171 Replies latest members adult

  • unstopableravens
    unstopableravens

    tec, can you explain to me a few things? how often do you hear voices? do you have a back and forthconversations? what makes you think or know that its jesus your talking with? thanks

  • tec
    tec

    I got to go to work, Unstop... but I'll talk with you later, okay?

    (please ignore all the 'interpretations' that some will now GIVE you as to the answer, lol)

    Peace to you!

    tammy

  • unstopableravens
    unstopableravens

    tec, okay, i really want to know the answers,

  • cofty
    cofty

    Unstop - there is no mystery.

    Option 1 - Reinterpret your internal conversation as god talking to you and don't let anybody tell you otherwise

    Option 2 - Conjure up your own tulpa... (takes time and effort)

  • unstopableravens
    unstopableravens

    i havent meet to many that have tec view on things, im interested to here her answers.

  • FlyingHighNow
    FlyingHighNow

    And don't let anyone, ANYONE decide your conclusions for you.

  • tec
  • zound
    zound

    Haven't read all pages so this may be covered -

    Matt Dilihunty commented on the term 'anti-theist', he said it shifted the burden of proof - meaning that an anti-theist now must assert some evidence AGAINST gods existence.

    I don't think I agree with that - 'anti' dictionary definition : "A person opposed to a concept or principle."

    So evidence that life under a god would suck as all that is needed to be asserted - which Hitchens does wonderfully.

  • adamah
    adamah

    Zound said-

    Matt Dilihunty commented on the term 'anti-theist', he said it shifted the burden of proof - meaning that an anti-theist now must assert some evidence AGAINST gods existence.

    I suspect you're misrepresenting his words.

    'Anti-theist' is NOT the same as 'atheist'; the first term refers to someone who is against religious practice (i.e. the rituals that are assocated with those who believe in God), but that position doesn't necessarily require making any claim.

    The 'hard atheist' claims that "God doesn't exist" (if a 'hard atheist') but the person who makes that claim then bears the burden of proof to back it up. That's why many atheists shy away from making the 'hard' claim; there's no reason to, since they feel it's not necessary, since it's easier just to let the theist state that God exists, and then let them be unable to prove THEIR assertion (and the default position for the skeptic is to reject ALL claims until they're presented with proof to accept).

    Matt's one of the few atheists who can make the 'hard' claim, and then use his knowledge of the Bible itself to support his claim.

    Adam

  • zound
    zound

    I don't think I'm misrepresenting his words. He said in an atheist experience episode that he doesn't call himself an anti-theist because it shifts the burden of proof. I don't know which episode but it was fairly recent.

    Here is a video not quite saying that but along the same path.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gK0wEUv0vVY

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit