Not So Polite Dinner Conversation – another vacuous Christian

Ugh, the last couple of weeks have been hard. Anxiety is up, starting a new job, a roof leak, and things just aren’t much fun.

Here’s a response to another vacuous Christian who insists that they don’t have to show that their claims are true. Nothing much new here. Memes at the end.

“So, if they bring up the idea that the burden of proof lies with me because I believe in an idea as a positive (God’s existence), while their position is God doesn’t exist (a negative), I don’t accept their premise that I have to prove anything to them. I flat out reject that assumption of theirs, because it’s a false assumption, but one of their STANDARD debating tactics. In sharing God, Christians have no burden to PROVE He exists to anyone.”

Actually you do have the burden of proof and you demand that evidence from everyone else who claims to have a god. The hypocrisy is typical. That you don’t accept logic doesn’t make it not true that you have the burden of proof.

You are sure that Zeus, Ahura Mazda, Wakan Tanka, Brahman, Tezcatlipoca, etc. all don’t exist, but can you show that they don’t?  That’s why when a Christian claims to not have the burden of proof, they are lying.

All you have are “ifs”, and you have yet to show your god exists at all. Since you cannot support your very basic claim, there is no reason to accept any of your “ifs”. I’m sure you don’t accept the claims of a Muslim, a Hindu, etc. when they say “if Allah exists”, “if brahman exists”, when they make their arguments.

Testimonials are used by all cults and they are worthless since all cults use them and each cultist is sure that only their personal experiences count. There is no evidence for any miracles at all, and again, other cults make the same claims you do. Why don’t you accept their claims?

As for evolutionary theory, it shows your god isn’t what is claimed in the bible. That Christians can’t agree on what their bible says shows that there is no reason to believe any of your versions, be it young earth creationism, old earth creationism or theistic evolution. That’s why evolution can be used to address claims of Christians. Not one of you can show that your version is any better than the others.

“When an atheist rails against the violence, judgments, or commands recorded in the Old Testament, their anger is fundamentally misdirected. According to their own professed worldview, God does not exist. If there is no Creator, then man alone is entirely responsible for every word written in the Bible, and man alone is responsible for every action taken before and after reading it. Therefore, the atheist does not hate a “fictional book character”—they hate the actions and nature of humanity.”

ROFL. Nice try but that’s quite a set of lies.  If man alone is responsible for the bible, then your cult fails.  We already know that man can be vicious, but your god is evidently as vicious as humans can be. I can hate the vicious nature of some humans.  Your god ends up worse than any of them with its breadth of violence and ignorance.

“I’ll leave you with this last argument. The atheist might say something similar to this: “How about the crazy man in (list any place) that claims to be Jesus Christ?” I remind the atheist that his world holds many people who claim to have personally experienced God in much higher esteem than his world holds him. Let’s name one of those people. How about Jesus Christ? Jesus is the most prominent character in the most widely published book in the history of the atheist’s world. And Jesus is a character whose existence is not refuted. How does the atheist’s world characterize Christ’s mark on humanity in comparison to that atheist’s mark on humanity? If he wants to imply we are all crazy, without directly saying that, I let him know that his world holds many of us in higher esteem than it does him. Fact or fiction?”

Nice appeal to authority fallacy, and it fails as all fallacies do. That some people hold some other people in high esteem doesn’t mean that their cult beliefs are true. There are billions that don’t hold your Jesus Christ in esteem, and Christians themselves can’t even agree on who Jesus is or what he even wants. That not one can show that Jesus Christ, in any version, existed at all shows how vacuous the cult actually is. You also fail with the “widely published book”. What about being published makes the bible true? The Qu ‘ran, Dianetics, etc. are all widely published and these Christians are sure that they are wrong. That Christians can’t even agree on what version of the bible is the right one, much less what the bible even means shows how false this appeal to popularity fallacy is.

That a cult makes a mark on humanity also doesn’t make it true. Islam has made quite a mark and they are sure it isn’t true.

Christians don’t think through their arguments yet again.

BTW, it’s hilarious how SOM admits he’s a liar and a fraud. Anyone who has ever read his garbage knows that already and he tries to claim that others are liars since he is. I always love these christians who use their god as a vending machine for “forgiveness”.