Showing posts with label world view. Show all posts
Showing posts with label world view. Show all posts

August 8, 2016

Fundamentally Flawed Atheistic Reasoning

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

Once again, I need to state that everyone has a worldview that is comprised of presuppositions (those things that we assume to be true without verification). Atheism is a weird belief with many aspects, and some people who profess atheism are actually agnostics (unsure of God's existence). I've even seen one tinhorn profess agnosticism and then jump the fence and identify as an atheist in the same post. So, atheists have a passel of presuppositions in their religion.

When given some examination, atheistic reasoning against God and the Bible is rather easily refuted at times.

I suspicion that some people want to call themselves atheists because they heard that atheists are the smartest people. That's demonstrably false. (It also leaves out the fact that many of the most brilliant people, past and present, have been not only Bible-believing Christians, but biblical creationists as well.) Often, Christians have challenged the claims of professing atheists, and the atheists are startled to find that they are not reasoning properly. That really puts a burr under their saddles.

When we point out that atheism is a religion, they come back reactions revealing their ignorance of legal decisions, philosophy and religion, and logic. Many times, they have their own redefinitions of religion, conveniently leaving out important aspects. Then they assert that atheism is based on logic. That'll be the day! To read more about this, click on "Feedback: Is Atheism a Religion?".

Scoffers try to sound intellectual when coming up with "reasons" to deny God's existence, recent special creation, the truth of the Bible, and more. Many of these objections are exceptionally weak and demonstrate lack of thinking skills. When attempting to use science to justify atheism, they fail miserably. See "Answering atheist arguments". 

As I stated earlier, those who claim that there is no God (or no evidence for him, in defiance of Romans 1:18-23) are presupposing materialism. From this, they claim that the Bible is false because it contains miracles, but there can be no miracles because God does not exist. That bit of circular reasoning really takes the rag off the bush! Ironically, atheists have their own corral full of miracles. For some brief examples of atheistic "reasoning" and how it can be easily refuted, read "Do the miracles of the Bible have natural explanations?"

Despite pretensions, atheism is not intellectual and they are not smarter than us st00pid dumb Xtians. There are many reasons people choose to be atheists, but such a position is not reached through logical thinking. Instead, it is emotional and spiritual — and they claim to deny spiritual aspects of humanity through their naturalism and materialism. The gospel is foolishness to them because it is spiritual, not something that the natural man can comprehend. But they can have salvation in Jesus Christ and become new creations. It begins with repentance and continues through the grace and mercy of God.
 

September 30, 2014

Problems with Secularist Theories of Knowledge

Back in college, I was not fond of philosophy and often cut class. One day, I showed up and it was test time. Essay test time. So I pulled out my mental shovel and piled it on and aced the test. Perhaps if we had started with theories of knowledge and presuppositions, I would have appreciated such things more. It took people like Jason Lisle and Greg Bahnsen to prompt my thinking in such areas.

Are there absolutes? How do you know what you know? What is your epistemology? Can we know things? How can we know anything? If we can't know things, then why can't we know them? We all have our starting points and use basic logic (such as the Law of Contradiction). Atheistic worldviews tend to be arbitrary and self-refuting in nature. Skepticism (the philosophy, not the modern stripped-down definition), Empiricism, Scientism, Rationalism and more are irrational and inconsistent.

We all have our ultimate starting points for our worldviews. The biblical Christian worldview is consistent, and has the necessary preconditions of intelligibility.

Jason Petersen of Answers for Hope discusses these matters in this 54-minute video presentation. A recommendation for people like me who play lectures at accelerated speed: Don't. The microphone is not close to Jason, and he talks at a decent speed anyway, so speeding it up may not be worth it.

April 30, 2014

Questioning the Dubious Duties of Darwin Drones

— Cowboy Bob Sorensen

"But, I held strongly to the view that it was an opportunity to expose the well-intending Ken Ham and the support he receives from his followers as being bad for Kentucky, bad for science education, bad for the U.S., and thereby bad for humankind — I do not feel I’m exaggerating when I express it this strongly."
 "...When I read the deliberate malicious stupid relentless lying evil from hypocrite Sorensen I start to wish that hell really exists. Because he will go there if it does if he does not repent of his hatred towards all people who criticise his online aggression and arrogance whilst wearing 'Christian' ie 'Bible defending' clothing.

"The Question Evolution Project is a Cesspit of Hate as I have demonstrated many times.

"Those caught in Bob's cesspit should get out while they can if they have any sense and if they are real Christians."
An irrational Stalker, and Bill Nye Fanboi 
"...The fact you refuse to learn evolution does NOT give you the right to spread disinformation; without that disinformation being criticized. Plainly put, this article is a crock of s**t."
— from a comment left at The Question Evolution Project

EDIT: Addendum at the bottom, people ironically proving me right.

It is puzzling how evolutionists, whether they are atheist, agnostic, theistic, old earth Scripture-compromising or something else seem to feel compelled to silence the opposition. Bill Nye, evolution's poster boy, has made ridiculous statements about how evolution is essential to understanding "science", indicating that he does not understand the nature of science himself. Richard Dawkins tells his followers to ridicule Christians (so much for "tolerance" — and atheists wonder why they are disliked by so many people). Various atheist celebrities make good money at writing books ridiculing "religion" and engaging in debates.

The rank-and-file drones patrol (emphasis on "troll") the interweb on a mission to find and attack Christian content. They seek it on social media, Weblogs, merchandising sites and more, then attack us. Especially biblical creationist content. They seem to be compelled to make a variety of comments that are inane, obscene, antagonistic, laughable or any combination thereof.

PD/US Military (modified)

Why? What do they hope to accomplish?

As you can see, some are consumed with blind hate. People who run other Pages on Facebook with Christian material will comment to me that they didn't really believe how depraved these atheopaths can be until they saw it themselves. I can understand that, since my reporting (as well as linking to comments of hateful people) does not have the impact for someone who does not experiencing it for himself or herself.

So, we question why.

I do know one answer: It's a spiritual thing. They deny the existence of God and suppress the truth in unrighteousness (Rom. 1.18-22). People are enemies of God (Rom. 5.15, Phil. 3.18) before they are adopted as God's children through the blood of Jesus Christ (John 1.12, Gal. 4.5-6). They are doing the will of their father down below (John 8.44), and though they think they are "freethinkers" using "reason", they are actually slaves to sin and cannot understand the things of God (1 Cor. 2.14, John 8.34, 1 Cor. 3.19-20). Sin affects the mind (Rom. 1.22.23). They hate God, the Word, humility for salvation — and us. Part of their hatred of God's people is based on the fact that we have been redeemed and represent God in the world. We stink to them (2 Cor. 2.15-16).

But another aspect of the "why" question defies reason: Why do they feel the need to protect science?


Creation science is "anti-science rhetoric" that harms the entire species according to this troll.

Whether the wandering Internet trolls or the high-profile evolutionists, they act like they're on a mission. From whom? Science itself does not need protection! What is worse, they are using bad reasoning to justify their activities, equivocating "science" with "evolution". But evolution is not science, it is speculation about the past using scientific processes to interpret things that are observed in the present. A great deal of evolutionary science is not scientific at all. Rather, it is metaphysics (especially when dealing with cosmogony). Speculations about evolution are frequently presented as scientific truth.

Many of Darwin's Drones seem to think you are stupid. Instead of letting you evaluate the evidence, you must be protected from creation science so you're not confused with facts that they do not want you to learn. They'll save you!

A tremendous irony is that many claim some kind of moral motive. We are "liars" because we disagree with evolutionary presuppositions and show their errors (which makes them furious). When we present our point of view and the facts that anti-creationist do not want you to know, they attack. Biblical creationists have the Bible as our ultimate standard of morality. They do not have an ultimate, consistent standard of morality. To say that we're evil, they are actually appealing to a higher standard — they're appealing to God and, therefore, to the biblical worldview! The meaning in their lives is based on a fundamentally flawed worldview that is irrational, incoherent and inconsistent.

Further, they feel they must eliminate biblical creation science. This is the opposite of the true spirit of scientific inquiry. Instead, science thrives on challenges; if a hypothesis or theory is found to be faulty, it is modified or even discarded. But not evolution. That stays no matter what. Dawkins said in The Blind Watchmaker that "Darwin made it possible to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist". There is a strong measure of humanistic arrogance in clinging to evolution, but it is also the spiritual problem that man is at war with God and does not wish to humble himself before the Creator.

My conclusion, then is that their fighting to promote evolution and suppress alternative viewpoints has a spiritual base. Man hates God and wants to proudly cling to "wisdom" and false "science" to justify rejection of God. No wonder they hate those of us who have a personal relationship with Jesus, the Creator who became a man, died for our sins, bodily rose from the dead and offers salvation. But it comes on his terms, not ours. We must humble ourselves and receive his gift (Ephesians 2.8-9).

Darwin's Cheerleaders can actually have purpose and meaning in their lives through Christ. They can build up instead of destroy.

ADDENDUM: People were so blinded by hate, they left comments that inadvertently proved me right.
Now why do you suppose this post, which has little to no value whatsoever, shows up as "what's hot and recommended"? I'll tell you why--it's because of all the creationist drones sharing and plussing it in a concerted, preplanned effort.  If this isn't a case of a pot calling the kettle black, I don't know what is. But I can't say that I'm even the least bit surprised. It's a common tactic of the religious to claim the exact opposite, and to project their worst traits onto their opponents.
— Left at Google Plus. Sounds paranoid, frankly.
 Lying never works in the long run - even if you're doing it for God.
— Left at Google Plus, very helpful, makes me a better person.

It's hardly a matter of "blind hate." I'd describe it more as an informed disgust. Most atheists who bash the bible and creationism know more about the bible than many Christians do. We know all about its promotion of rape, slavery, and mass murder and find its barbaric teachings and factual inaccuracies disgusting not only on a personal level, but we feel it has held back scientific progress for centuries. The bible is a relic whose teachings should be recognized only from the standpoint of mythologies...
— Left at Google Plus, incomplete because I copied it from my e-mail notification. You get the point, though, full of prejudicial conjecture and hatred, then claiming to be smarter than all the Christians.

These comments have been deleted from the Google Plus post. Why? Because I'm not obligated to give non-thinking haters a platform for their egos and vitriol, nor do I want to waste time in a fruitless "discussion" with minds like these.



March 23, 2013

Atheism, Materialism, Relativism and Reason


We have seen in numerous posts that atheism is an incoherent, irrational, unreasonable and self-defeating worldview (as is its confused, timid kid brother, agnosticism). Evolution is a cornerstone of this belief system, since both rely on materialism, a self-affirming and intellectually suffocating idea that starts and ends with the physical universe. Atheism and evolutionism also rely on viciously circular reasoning. To admit that there really is a Creator would destroy atheism instantly, because that would imply that we need to find out what the Creator has to say to us.

Further, atheism relies on relativism, a convenient means of excusing thoughtlessness and convenience-based "morality". Relativism is an absurd philosophy.
"Relativism is the concept that points of view have no absolute truth or validity, having only relative, subjective value according to differences in perception and consideration... The term often refers to truth relativism, which is the doctrine that there are no absolute truths." -Wikipedia.org
____________________________

Many atheists claim that truth is relative, meaning they reject objective and absolute truth.

And in fact, to hold this position is consistent with the atheistic worldview.

...But is relativism a reasonable worldview?

Absolutely not.

"Here Comes The Storm..."

A worldview without real truth is a house built on the sand!

Observe the mental chaos that ensues when we critically examine atheistic relativism...

1. If relative truth is true, then it is false; to call it true is to appeal to absolute/universal truth.

Note: As we shall see, objective/absolute truth is true, and MUST be true...

2. The person that claims no truth denies the truth of their claim.

Note: A person who claims "there is no truth" is making a truth claim - which can't be true if truth doesn't exist!

3. The person that claims no truth can be certain of nothing.

Note: How can one hold certainty, if nothing is true?

4. The person that is certain of nothing isn't certain of it.

Note: This is an absurdity of a worldview without certainty.

5. The person that claims no truth denies the law of non contradiction, as the law of non contradiction states that something cannot be both true and not true at the same time and in the same way.

Note: The human mind is inherently bound by non contradictory thought processes. Have you ever tried to imagine a "square circle"? Your mind will flip from square to circle, but never to both at once. And truth is foundational to this logical thought process.
If you're ready to pursue the rest of this philosophical exercise and see more of why we say that atheism is irrational, you can read the rest of "Atheism: A House Built On Sand".

February 17, 2013

Video — Eukaryotic Cells Refute Evolution

Evolution cannot withstand scrutiny. But it is foundational to liberal Christianity, other irrational religions and especially the incoherence known as atheistm. That's why evolution is protected, and contrary evidence suppressed, by the Evo Sith in their efforts to protect their fundamentally flawed worldviews.

And yet, the truth is discovered. Oh, sure, the protectors are sent scrambling to find excuses to keep their failed "theory" intact. Here is another short video with more information to show that evolution is a fundamentally flawed belief system. That is, evolutionism keeps looking more and more far-fetched because the evidence shows the Creator. How good is that?

December 31, 2012

Video: Eric Hovind Wrecks Atheists' "Logic"

Really, destroying what passes for logic in the minds of most Internet atheopaths is not difficult at all. In this video, Eric Hovind will not let atheists off the hook in this discussion. They cannot justify their belief systems, show terrible reasoning skills and want people to simply accept their a priori presuppositions. Eric allows none of that.

By the way, note her contradiction: It's OK for Eric to believe the way he does, but it's not OK because his views are somehow "dangerous". He catches her in lies, too.

July 22, 2012

Atheism: Sliding Downward Into Apathy

Thank God modern atheism is sliding into a downward spiral. One thing I have noticed among modern fundamentalist Internet atheists is denial. When they are show how atheism is on the slide, they resort to the infallible scientific response of "making stuff up". They will call me a liar, whomever publicized the statistics a liar, insist that atheism is growing rapidly, use the laughable canard that "Christianity will be gone in a hundred years", (Sorry, Sweetums, that's been said for centuries. It backfired miserably on Voltaire, because one of his homes is owned by the Geneva Bible Society!), and other irrational responses. Anger, denial — from the way these atheists conduct themselves, I would not be surprised to learn of even more acts of violence by atheists.

Ironically, they portray themselves as nice people who never bother anyone, that their only difference is that they "lack belief" in God — a transparently disingenuous escape. (For one thing, "lack of belief" never prompted anyone to be a jerk and treat people like garbage, but these theophobes do exactly that.) The anger and denial increase, and yet, they claim to believe in "reason", and will follow where the evidence leads. But this, too, is a lie. The ego and pride of types like this is astronomical, so it is exceptionally difficult for them to admit that they're wrong. How foolish is that?

Meanwhile, the surge of interest in atheism from a few years ago is indeed fading. I have my own suspicions as to why this is so:
  • Atheists make their own "Poes"; people get sick of their vituperative diatribes and foolishness, and those atheists are growing tired of being despised for being unplesant
  • Atheism is a fad, and the shock value of telling Aunt Martha after church, "I'm an atheist" is not getting the attention that is craved
  • People are standing up to them, and showing that their worldview is fundamentally flawed
  • These obstreperous atheists are realizing that hatred of God and his people is unfulfilling
  • Atheism is not only intellectually unfulfilling, but it raises more questions than answers
  • The increase in Christianity, and in Biblical creationism
  • They are beginning to realize that the Biblical creationist worldview is the only one that makes sense and has consistency, and that Christianity is reasonable (for the few that are intellectually honest enough to actually examine it)
If you want me to back up my remarks above, fuggedaboudit. Most are opinions based on my observations, experiences, articles I have read and so forth. But I have something below that further documents the continued decline of atheism.
Atheism experienced a surge of public interest due to some best selling books in the years 2004 - 2007, but the interest was not sustainable. The media hype surrounding these books and the books themselves did not gain any significant amount of new adherents to atheism in the United States. In March of 2008m the USA Today noted that survey data failed to show any discernible increase in the amount of atheists due to this publicity campaign.

The public's interest in evolutionism is now declining and global atheism is shrinking in adherents and market share.

There are a number of atheists and evolutionists who are angry about these matters and/or in denial. Why is this so? It is not because I did not provide enough evidence about this matters as I provided data from academic research, books, leading web traffic tracking companies and Google Trends. On the other hand, atheists and evolutionists provided no compelling set of data rebutting the validity of the data I provided nor my conclusions concerning this data.

July 21, 2012

Let's Be Blunt — Atheism is Bad Philosophy

Despite the rants of misotheists, atheism is an unworkable worldview. Biblical Christianity is the only way to make sense of the questions of life.

If you are an atheist you may be offended by the following material. You may feel it is a personal attack, but it is an ideological one. I realize that no two people are exactly alike. I know many people have good, meaningful and moral lives without religion. At the deepest level my criticism is my way of understanding why atheism didn't work for me in the end. However it is scathing on atheism ideologically, so be prepared.

My provocative and polemical style here arises not least from the polemical nature of atheism itself. I am making an essential critique of the literal meaning of atheism, the denial of the existence God, in a brief but strict philosophical argument about ideology. I'm subjecting atheism to its own rationalist analysis, I'm just doing so in a way which also acknowledges that ideas are real, which atheism seems somewhat reluctant to do.
Read the rest of "Why Atheism is Bad Philosophy", here.

April 12, 2012

Atheism, Evolutionism and Morality

Buon giorno. While reading True Reason: Christian Responses to the Challenge of Atheism, something occurred to me. This section of the book was pointing out how the so-called "new atheists" will conflate "reason" with morality. As I have seen it, "I claim to be rational and use reason. You are religious, so you do not use reason, just ignore my genetic fallacies here. I am a better person than you are!" In addition, I have been attacked with being called a liar because I disagree with the interpretations of the facts regarding evolution. Amazing. They conflated so badly that they could not tell the difference between a difference of opinion and a moral flaw. Joseph Lister's germ theory was met with disbelief, but I seriously doubt that other scientists called him a liar.

But I digress.

An evolutionary worldview does not provide a realistic basis for morality.
Morality is a very difficult problem for the evolutionary worldview. This is not to say that evolutionists are somehow less moral than biblical creationists—or anyone else. Most evolutionists adhere to a moral code and believe in the concept of right and wrong. But evolutionists have no rational reason for this position. Thus, only creationists have a rational, logical, and consistent reason for morality.
Read the rest of "Morality and the Irrationality of an Evolutionary Worldview", here. If you dare.

January 14, 2012

The Irrationality of Atheism

Buona sera. On a personal experience, subjective perspective, it is easy to see that atheism is irrational. Just look at what it does to people:
  • Vituperative trolling on the Internet, often under multiple assumed names
  • Fundamentalist jihad replaces rational thought, where hatred of Christians is more important than the logic that they claim to appreciate
  • Basic lack of civility — this makes me wonder if the hate-consumed angry atheists are unemployable, as they spend an inordinate amount of time attacking people on the Internet
  • Digging into philosophical mires where they insist that they are right despite how silly they look; they are almost never wrong, especially if it means that a Christian is right about something. Essentially, the atheist insists, "I'm right, you're wrong because I said so!" They're cute when illogical.
  • Using fundamentally flawed "evidence" for evolution, no matter how outdated, disproved and just plain bad
But enough of my observations and speculations on the atheism worldview.
Here is an article by Dr. Jason Lisle that is quite fascinating:
Atheists are “coming out of the closet” and becoming more vocal about their message that “there is no God.” Professor Richard Dawkins (Britain’s leading atheist) is encouraging those who share his views to express their opinion. Author of The God Delusion, Dawkins says he wants to “free children from being indoctrinated with the religion of their parents or their community.” Will Christians be prepared to “give an answer” to the atheists’ claims?

Materialistic atheism is one of the easiest worldviews to refute. A materialistic atheist believes that nature is all that there is. He believes that there is no transcendent God who oversees and maintains creation. Many atheists believe that their worldview is rational—and scientific. However, by embracing materialism, the atheist has destroyed the possibility of knowledge, as well as science and technology. In other words, if atheism were true, it would be impossible to prove anything!

June 9, 2009

Blame God

Buona sera. Today's rant is a bit different. It's from the heart (I do have one despite what my ex will tell you), there are no hard facts — but some reasoning.

Lemme 'splain, Lucy. I'm going to connect my conclusions with my observations, and I'm going to show a bit of "two can play at that game".

Due to circumstances that I will not discuss, I had to watch some of a soap opera. (To be politically correct, "daytime drama". To be honest, "waste of time".) But I have to give some credit to the actors, actresses, writers and director because the cast was doing quite well in looking like the infant on the show really was in imminent danger of dying from a virulent disease. I almost wanted to reach out and comfort the sobbing babes.

One scene set off a mental chain reaction for me. She was in a hospital chapel and saying to God, "Is this what you want? What are you doing? Spare the child" and that sort of thing. Well, that sort of reaction has bothered me for years. I cannot believe in, and I do not find Scriptural support for, the idea that God causes illnesses to teach you, or someone else, a lesson. Perhaps that can be inferred in the Bible with some isolated cases, but it's not a general rule.

I'm going to interject that people say some amazingly stupid things when a child dies. They want to be comforting, and sometimes they want to look like they're full of wisdom. Yes, I can get along with "He's in a better place". Stuff like "God wanted one more angel, so he took your baby up to Heaven..." I have to walk away! Besides, angels are not dead people, capice?

Now I'm going to tie this in with a conversation I had with Tommy the Knocker. The conversation was more civil that it looks on the screen, and he was playing Devil's Advocate to help give me a mental workout. And no, I'm not going to pretend that I have all the answers. But I do have some of the answers, and also offer alternatives to what some people say. No way am I going to make this an extended theological treatise!

TK: If God made everything, why is there death and disease?

Me: Everything was perfect at first. There were physical consequences to the sin of Adam and Eve. That "free will" thing has a lot of responsibility. We are the created beings, we cannot fully understand the creator.

TK: People want God to stop the suffering because he's supposed to be all-powerful and all-loving. That's why the woman in the show was crying and praying that way.

Me: We make demands of the creator of the universe and expect him to be a cosmic Santa Claus; if we don't get everything we want, the way we want it, when we want it, we think he doesn't care or isn't even real.

TK: If there was a God, he could stop all illness, war, evil and all that. So there must not be a God.

Me: You can also say that the results of (blank) election prove that there is no God. It's always amazed me that people want to blame God or assume he's not real. But the facts also add up the other way: The existence of all the evils that you see in the world are evidence that there is a Satan and his minions. The Bible tells about him, too, you know. And I think the existence of Satan should be obvious if someone bothers to think.

TK: Give another answer for evil in the world adding up to belief in "no God".

Me: People with this narrow view forget all the good that has happened, even in our daily lives. Little things count, and there are big things...ever hear of St. Jude's Children's Hospital? World Vision? Samaritan's Purse? Good old Salvation Army? Bright Hope International? Church specific, denomination specific on the local level? Or other research and medical outfits? Those were started by Christians. "You know them by their fruits", and Christians have been doing good for others for centuries. Sure, there are Jewish organizations as well, I don't want to claim a monopoly. But I don't know of Muslims doing anything for those outside of their religion. Hey, have you ever known of an atheist organization that did anything for anyone? Maybe atheists are good people, but they don't have history on their side for doing good deeds.

OK, that's enough. My point is that the "evil in the world" is a biased world view, and there is plenty of evidence for people doing good in God's name. Evil does not rule. Yes, there is suffering and sickness. We try to overcome it, and I believe that God inspires people to discover cures and advances in medicine. But remember, the created cannot fully understand the creator. No, it's not a cop-out, it's the truth.

Back to the usual snarkiness and sarcasm later.

Subscribe in a reader