On Converting Atheists

102 posts / 0 new
Last post
arakish's picture


And I almost completely agree with Old Man. I love everyone's posts: Sheldon, Greensnake, Old Man, Tin-Man, Cognostic, LogicForTW, etc., etc. I usually do not like mine own mile long post because I do tend to rant. I need to get it under control, but some times, it just comes out. But I guess that is just me. I love others mile long posts (excepting theists), just not so much the ones I do. But if others like them, who am I to argue? Not my place or province.

Keep up the hard work y'all. Especially when I out in the field. Right now, trying to play with ketchup here.


Addenda: No changes to above text, but realized I am still tired. Just look at the first 8-word sentence...

Sheldon's picture
It's odd but when I re-read a

It's odd but when I re-read a post I often think it's way too long and set about reducing the size, and nearly always end up adding to it slightly. As arakish says I find that theists on the whole tend to lack brevity, but this is probably because I find their reasoning so hard to follow that it becomes tortuous for me. It's why I often break quotes from large apologetics and offer specific answers, it's not an attempt to quote out of context, but rather to address what I see as obvious errors in reasoning.

Rarely do I encounter apologists who can concisely and rationally explain what they believe, and why. No surprise really as I'd likely share their beliefs if I could. I think this was always generally the case as well. When I was a child and subject to religious teachings without choice I rarely found their arguments cogent.

Kataclismic's picture
The atheist need not present

The atheist need not present an argument, they need only be convinced.

Randomhero1982's picture
So going back to the original

So going back to the original OP... can i first say that almost the entire first paragraph appears to be a cop out.

Also, It cannot convert via the scientific method because it doesn't support the premise.

The final point kind of implies that we are all ardent supporters of the scientific method which underpins of atheistic world view...

This isn't quite the case.

For me, my reasoning is probably very simplistic before I even get to considering science or the scientific method.

I use rational thought, my senses, common sense and probability to a degree... I think these offer reasonable scopes for at least a basic foundation to investigate a claim.

For example, let's take the claim Jesus was resurrected and ascended to heaven...

Rationally thinking I would surmise what is more likely, this is true or people lie and so fourth?

Let's answer that with probability and a small bit of common sense, what is the probability someone can be tortured and stabbed with a spear (most theologians believe to the heart causing death by cardiac shock), die six hours later and was risen from the dead 3 days later....

Ok now I would consider this rationally as being massively unlikely, but many would say we still cannot say 100% certain it's not true, so let's move on and accept this so far.

Now move to his disappearance from the tomb, no two books can agree on what happened.

So now I would consider this to be most likely hearsay, but hey who knows, let's move on.

And so 40 days later I believe, he ascends to heaven... up into the sky and hidden by clouds.

Ok so let's this whittle this down from an atheistic perspective using common sense, our senses, our interaction with reality, what we experience and so fourth...

Could he survive crucifixion - possibly but unlikely

Could he survive a spear to the heart - 99% no I would claim

Can anyone float into the sky unaided - no

So in closing, this is why I consider Christianity to be bollocks.

Same for Islam, with similar claims of flying on winged horses and many other apparent miracles.

From there we have a solid expectation that this claim is as unreasonable as it is unlikely, but we then take it to a next step and look for evidence.

Is there evidence to support the claims, yes from his followers! Ok so some respectability attained.

But how about not from potentially bias sources, well only really from the Roman Tacticus who wasn't even around at the time and was born roughly 20 years after the fact and mentioned him loosely by name once in all his works.

So not looking good!

We could go on and on but essentially it progressively gets worse.

I would then say we could move to the scientific method which albeit does not provide proof of anything, it is undeniably the best tool for modelling reality, testing it and understanding it...

In this case, the theological claims suffer quiet badly.

So in summery I think it's easy to dismiss the claims of religion.

xenoview's picture


Still waiting for the testable evidence that your
God is real.

You can't logic God into existence.

I have prayed to god, God hasn't answered me
I have ask God to reveal itself to me, God remains hidden
Therefore God doesn't exist, and I remain an atheist


arakish's picture
I am still waiting for an

I am still waiting for an apology, or that objectively and hard empirical evidence to convert us.

Apology Required: That he (calhais) intentionally started this thread for nothing else than click-bait to feed his narcissistic personality disorder.


amanishakhete's picture
I just received this link in

I just received this link in my email today. I do not know where these xtians are or how they keep finding me, but I wish they would disappear.



Attach Image/Video?: 

Tin-Man's picture
Howdy, Queen! Welcome to the

Howdy, Queen! Welcome to the AR!

If I may make a suggestion, every time one of the Christian sites/people send you that type of link, simply be polite and return the favor. Perhaps share with them a few Dark Matter and/or Non-Stamp Collector vids. Not only are they educational, they are highly entertaining. *grin*

Old man shouts at clouds's picture
Hi Queen and welcome!

Hi Queen and welcome!

I see the flim flam man and snake oil salesmen are alive and well! Sheesh, and I expect people are still sucked in by this nonsense. "Dating all the way back to Adam" LoL.

arakish's picture
The one thing that pissed me

The one thing that pissed me off was getting a Christmas ad in my email on 07/29/2018.

What the hell?! We ain't even got through Labor Day yet.


Sheldon's picture
Whilst I'm happy to accept

To calhais:

Whilst I'm happy to accept Christians don't have objective evidence for their beliefs anymore than any other theists do, why would I set a different standard for accepting the validity of religious claims than I set for all other claims?

What you're talking about sounds like a special pleading fallacy to me. It's also worth pointing out that refusing to accept the tenets of christianity that theists use to justify their belief, doesn't mean atheists haven't examined them carefully, and simply don't see them as valid criteria for belief. In others words your claim atheists are "refusing to consider them" is poorly worded IMHO. Considering them carefully and finding them deeply flawed reasons to believe is closer to how I would describe my own position, but by all means present arguments for belief in a deity and we'll examine them.

NB The very fact we keep asking for them to demonstrate reasons or evidence for their beliefs, shows that most atheists here are not "refusing to consider" those beliefs or the reasons behind them, but having considered them find them uncompelling.

The limits of science are not relevant. At least until theists present some tangible method for validating their claims, that is remotely objective.

Why don't theists present The best reasons they have for their beliefs, alongside a precise definition of those beliefs. Then every individual can decide If they find them at all compelling.


Donating = Loving

Heart Icon

Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.

Or make a one-time donation in any amount.