Bigdog...you can do better than this steaming pile of crap!
You Can't Make an Athiest Think
33 Comments - 1364 Views
the book that reached No. 1 on Amazon among books about religion and even atheism.
Submitted By bigdog on 09/03/18
FreeHovind, bigdog, General
http://shop.wnd.com/store/item.asp?ITEM_ID=2690&AD_ID=EMA021
the book that reached No. 1 on Amazon among books about religion and even atheism.
New Book: 'You Can Lead an Atheist to Evidence, But You Can't Make Him Think'
By: Ray Comfort
"To be an atheist is to play Russian roulette with all the chambers loaded..."
"An atheist just can't win. Of course, he feels and acts like a big player, until the trigger is pulled. The issue isn't the existence of God. If he is wrong and there is a Creator,then he was wrong. He gambled and he lost. No big deal. The real gamble is that there's no Hell. That's what makes the player sweat, just a little. 'What if...?'"
In this entertaining and enlightening new book, Pastor Ray Comfort, author of the million-selling The Atheist Test, "talks to the atheists" and reveals not just the weakness of their arguments but the solid foundation upon which the Christian stands.
Few books take the time to address the atheist's conscience. "You Can Lead an Atheist to Evidence, But You Can't Make Him Think" not only gives empirical evidence for the existence of God, it shows atheists that they desperately need His forgiveness. Using a lively Q&A format, featuring actual questions from atheists sent to Pastor Comfort's blog at Atheist Central, "You Can Lead An Atheist to Evidence, But You Can't Make Him Think" shows that God's existence can be proven, and that anyone can do it!
http://shop.wnd.com/store/item.asp?ITEM_ID=2690&AD_ID=EMA021
» Reply to CommentRe: You Can't Make an Athiest Think
Kevin Lyon (physicist)
1 day - 1,818v
Posted 2009/03/18 - 17:35 GMT
» Reply to CommentRe: You Can't Make an Athiest Think
if there is a god, well so be it. then i'll have a nice conversation with his infinateness when i die. if there isn't all your praising and cnverting was in vain, and you deluded yourself for a long time ^^.
and about hell. if i live a good life, i think that an infinate and kind god will have a better idea then hell, if there is a god that is.
to bad your "CONVERT OR BURN!" fear doesn't work on rational people :P
oh and that "empirical evidence' to bad you probably CAN'T test it. or i can just smoke some, and see god in a teacup.
» Reply to CommentRe: You Can't Make an Athiest Think
The definition of “empirical”:
a. Relying on or derived from observation or experiment
b. Verifiable or provable by means of observation or experiment
What experiments have been done to prove the existence of god? I’m talking about repeated trials, conducted in a laboratory, that lead to the unwavering conclusion that god exists. You can try to prove that the earth is 6000 years old, or that there was a flood, or that dinosaurs lived with humans. That still doesn’t provide direct evidence of a god.
a. Relying on or derived from observation or experiment
b. Verifiable or provable by means of observation or experiment
What experiments have been done to prove the existence of god? I’m talking about repeated trials, conducted in a laboratory, that lead to the unwavering conclusion that god exists. You can try to prove that the earth is 6000 years old, or that there was a flood, or that dinosaurs lived with humans. That still doesn’t provide direct evidence of a god.
» Reply to CommentRe: You Can't Make an Athiest Think
Haven't you ever heard the old Comfort "banana argument"? Its hilarious! Here's a link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aLqQttJinjo
It truly worries me that he thinks that God would rather be making bananas than stoping natural disasters, disease, and war.
» Reply to CommentRe: You Can't Make an Athiest Think
The real gamble is that there's no Hell. That's what makes the player sweat, just a little. 'What if...?'"
That notion should also frighten the followers of nearly every religion. After all, there are dozens of religions - and almost all of them claim that followers of all other religions are bound for hell. What if you're following the wrong God?
"To require man to follow the one, true faith - and then force him to choose it from among a multitude of false ones seems like an extraordinarily poor way to run any organization, much less one the size of the universe." -Robert A. Heinlein
» Reply to CommentRe: You Can't Make an Athiest Think
All have a different judgment according to the cards we're dealt in life.
Luke Chapter 12:45 (Jesus said) But and if that servant say in his heart, My lord delayeth his coming; and shall begin to beat the menservants and maidens, and to eat and drink, and to be drunken;
46 The lord of that servant will come in a day when he looketh not for him, and at an hour when he is not aware, and will cut him in sunder, and will appoint him his portion with the unbelievers.
47 And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes.
48 But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much REQUIRED: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more.
» Reply to CommentRe: You Can't Make an Athiest Think
I'd like to ask you a question, I believe in a creator in the broader sense, and i respect Jesus the man. If I were to die right now, do you think I deserve to be burned in a fiery pit for all eternity?
» Reply to CommentRe: You Can't Make an Athiest Think
Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses like to make a similar claim - basically (and I paraphrase) "If you're aware of our teachings and you reject them, then you'll be even worse off in the long run than those who never even knew of our teachings to begin with."
» Reply to CommentRe: You Can't Make an Athiest Think
So you dont believe in anything you cant put in a lab eh? Too bad.
» Reply to CommentRe: You Can't Make an Athiest Think
I'm sorry, was that a reply for me?
» Reply to CommentRe: You Can't Make an Athiest Think
If it can’t be done empirically (not necessarily in a lab, but with consistent experiments), you have to ask your self the obvious question of “why not?”.
» Reply to CommentRe: You Can't Make an Athiest Think
Hello, I'm a Pantheist.
God is the life, entity and perceiver of all living things. If an Atheist could understand this, then "Atheist" would not exist", as they do today. They should all be a Pantheist or Theist.
I can understand NOT believing in a Deity (Supreme Being), but I don't understand in not believing in a non-deity God, such as: "The Universe". Hmm? Because, it all plays a roll in making it possible for that Atheist to be alive and to be breathing. There body is haunted by them, which is the Entity or Perceiver of God, which makes God a He, She, or It. That is how God works and that is how God is everywhere and everything.
I see God as a whole, where as, Christians seperate their God from the Universe and them-selves. They say that "God" is not Matter, Time, or Space. If God is seperated from the Universe and our-selves, then God (Deity) does not exist; therefore, through us mathimatically and logically does, but as a non-deity God.
In other words, I'm a part of God, as much as, God is a part of me. If you punish me, you punish God. You punish God, you punish me. God can't punish it-self, as I can't punish my-self and vise-versa.
I have good answers to everything. If you want my hypotheises or theories to anything, just let me know. Just keep in mind that some things have been sciencetifically prooven, such as: Homo Sapeins verses today's Humans. Please don't tell me that is not Evolution. Not that I believe, we are from Monkeys or Apes. I'll explain that some other time, if you like. That would change the whole subject. I'm trying to keep it sweet and simple. =)
I can understand NOT believing in a Deity (Supreme Being), but I don't understand in not believing in a non-deity God, such as: "The Universe". Hmm? Because, it all plays a roll in making it possible for that Atheist to be alive and to be breathing. There body is haunted by them, which is the Entity or Perceiver of God, which makes God a He, She, or It. That is how God works and that is how God is everywhere and everything.
I see God as a whole, where as, Christians seperate their God from the Universe and them-selves. They say that "God" is not Matter, Time, or Space. If God is seperated from the Universe and our-selves, then God (Deity) does not exist; therefore, through us mathimatically and logically does, but as a non-deity God.
In other words, I'm a part of God, as much as, God is a part of me. If you punish me, you punish God. You punish God, you punish me. God can't punish it-self, as I can't punish my-self and vise-versa.
I have good answers to everything. If you want my hypotheises or theories to anything, just let me know. Just keep in mind that some things have been sciencetifically prooven, such as: Homo Sapeins verses today's Humans. Please don't tell me that is not Evolution. Not that I believe, we are from Monkeys or Apes. I'll explain that some other time, if you like. That would change the whole subject. I'm trying to keep it sweet and simple. =)
» Reply to CommentRe: You Can't Make an Athiest Think
I went through a brief stage in my life, between Catholicism and atheism, where I considered myself a pandeist. I believed that god was present in everything, but held no authority or control over us. Then I realized how ridiculous that sounded. The universe was obviously generated by some sort of force or energy, but to claim that the thing had human-like characteristics (intelligence, ingenuity, ect) is just naive. I still like the idea of pandeism though. I think of all the ways of viewing god, it’s the one that’s most compatible with modern science.
» Reply to CommentRe: You Can't Make an Athiest Think
Compatible? Most scientists see science compatible with the belief in GOD, although the denominations may vary.
http://www.livescience.com/strangenews/050811_scientists_god.html
Thousands of scientists contribute to ICR, a young earth institute. Here's an article about how many scientists are too scared to admit their belief in creationism, because it could affect there jobs.
http://creationwiki.org/Many_current_scientists_reject_evolution
As for Joe, the Bible says "all have fallen short of the glory of GOD." Jesus made it too easy to go to Heaven by his payment for our sins, so to reject his teaching is to reject him. But to accept him is eternal life as he promises.
» Reply to CommentRe: You Can't Make an Athiest Think
"Hello, I'm a Pantheist. God is the life, entity and perceiver of all living things. If an Atheist could understand this, then "Atheist" would not exist", as they do today. They should all be a Pantheist or Theist."
you call it god, i call it life or the unexplained. so no, i can understand, but i'd rather stick with what i got now, because of MY standard of evidence.
you call it god, i call it life or the unexplained. so no, i can understand, but i'd rather stick with what i got now, because of MY standard of evidence.
» Reply to CommentRe: You Can't Make an Athiest Think
Evidence for an old earth is not really evidence, just speculation. No historical evidence goes past 6,000 years. The geologic column and radio metric dating have to many problems to be trusted.
» Reply to CommentRe: You Can't Make an Athiest Think
What evidence is there for a young earth?
» Reply to CommentRe: You Can't Make an Athiest Think
"What evidence is there for a young earth?"
the bible.
writing only goes back untill the agricultural revolution.
stone tools however, go back a lot longer.
bigdog, again you just state and don't ground.
» Reply to CommentRe: You Can't Make an Athiest Think
Stone tools go back a lot longer? How do they date that? Radio metric dating and the geologic column? Those have been proven to be faulty use of evidence. My friends Mexican grandma uses a stone to make salsa. Does that mean she's a cavewoman?
» Reply to CommentRe: You Can't Make an Athiest Think
Radiometric dating has flaws, but if a sample is properly prepared then the results can be quite accurate. To say it’s “faulty” is an oversimplification of the process. In reality, a variety of dating techniques would be used. Furthermore, several trials would be done on various samples from the site. The results from these methods and trials would be compiled to make an estimate, with error taken into account.
» Reply to CommentRe: You Can't Make an Athiest Think
"How do they date that? Radio metric
dating and the geologic column? Those have been proven to be faulty use
of evidence. "
Wow...this isn't even a coherent thought....
» Reply to CommentRe: You Can't Make an Athiest Think
"Does that mean she's a cavewoman?"
no.
» Reply to CommentRe: You Can't Make an Athiest Think
"The geologic column and radio metric dating have to many problems to be trusted."
This comming from someone who has no idea how radiometric dating works or what it's limitations are. Forgive me if I have to scoff a tad... You come across with such a attitude of authority. It is kinda cute....if not a tad pathetic.
» Reply to CommentRe: You Can't Make an Athiest Think
It doesn't take a genius. All we have to do is look at the results when testing it against rocks of known ages.
» Reply to CommentRe: You Can't Make an Athiest Think
"It doesn't take a genius. All we have to do is look at the results when testing it against rocks of known ages."
you know what.
bigdog ACTUALLY DO THE TESTS!
go date 100 samples agains somethign of a know age.
and make sure they are all in perfect testign condition.
THEN go and say that again.
and quit using anamolies to "prove" it doesn't work.
» Reply to CommentRe: You Can't Make an Athiest Think
yea...particularly well understood anomalies!
» Reply to CommentRe: You Can't Make an Athiest Think
"It doesn't take a genius. All we have to do is look at the results when testing it against rocks of known ages."
Sure enough...and how, pray tell, do you assess the "known ages" of said rocks? By the way, I was under the impression we were discussing carbon dating specifically...was I mistaken?
» Reply to CommentRe: You Can't Make an Athiest Think
We were talking about Radio metric dating. and K-Ar dating. Just look at all the mistakes compared to any accurate date. The innacurate dates outnumber the correct dates. That's of the one's we know of. So to blindly suggest an accurate date of an object that nobody knows, like a rock, is wishful thinking. Definately far from solid science.
» Reply to CommentRe: You Can't Make an Athiest Think
"The innacurate dates outnumber the correct dates."
Bigdog...this simply is NOT TRUE! You see I cannot provide a counter argument for this...it is quite frustrating because you have not provided any source whatsoever. You are following in Kent Hovind's footsteps all to closely. You cannot just ASSERT something this audacious without backing it up. Radiometric dating techniques are EXCEEDINGLY accurate when tested against samples of known dates. In fact most often several different techniques are used to date samples of unknown ages and they are pretty darn close to always EXCEEDINGLY consistent. I can't stress enough that these techniques have been through the fire, have been highly scrutinized and refined to a point that they now provide ridiculously reliable results. What you are claiming is just simply false.
» Reply to CommentRe: You Can't Make an Athiest Think
"It doesn't take a genius. All we have to do is look at the results when testing it against rocks of known ages."
Yes, and when we do this they agree...time after time after time again. I know this is hard for you to accept, it is actually rather difficult for me to really take in, but Kent Hovind is a LIAR...He accuses everyone else of harboring "Lies in the Textbooks" but he is a stone cold liar who has simply learned that sometimes the most effective rhetorical technique is to simply be the loudest and the most audacious.
» Reply to CommentRe: You Can't Make an Athiest Think
The thing with radiometric dating is that we know many dates are false when up against historic records. So to date unkown aged rocks and trust it is foolish. It is blind faith.
» Reply to CommentRe: You Can't Make an Athiest Think
"The thing with radiometric dating is that we know many dates are false when up against historic records."
...you can either link the test results that showed that AND excluded the all the possibilities of contamination or interference, or..
you can shut up.
» Reply to CommentRe: You Can't Make an Athiest Think
"The thing with radiometric dating is that we know many dates are false when up against historic records. So to date unkown aged rocks and trust it is foolish. It is blind faith."
Show me the paper...and I'll show you why you are wrong. However, here you go again making grand claims and backing them up with absolutely zip. I cannot stress enough...again...that these dating techniques have been highly scrutinized and have been exceedingly well verified. I feel like a broken record...how about you bigdog...broken record..is that your problem?
Legal: none of this site's content is copyrighted unless it specifically says otherwise.
