Search Results
7/12/2025, 9:35:39 AM
>>510160096
because it proves that this has nothing to do with science its a complete red herring basis saying the discussion is about evidence when the presumption that God doesn't exist is absurd given all the evidence for him is the same evidence athiests were turn around and say proves God doesn't exist.
Its just an arrogative lie.
If you make the arguement that every single issue that atheists raise stems from a trust issue because of religion or the damage dealt to them by life in general, you'll be 99% correct everytime. The book even tells you this happens as a result of people trying to do things God never asked them to do to be forgiven, and that the basis for these things being done was entirely vain self idolization to begin with. Which is exact the arguementation they use against religion, its a satanic strawman, the gospel was never advocating for religion, Jesus annhilated it when he went to the cross. You simply believe the gospel, you're saved.
It's that simple, but despite all the pascal wagering logic and simple moment of faith that its asking for, atheists require a universe of evidence in order to passively believe in something they innately know by using their own skeptic epistemology, that skepticism implies that they already do not believe it, and instead is just a fishhook to demoralize people who do, by feigning openness for "debate", when in actuality all atheists want to do, is publically one up believers over shit the book was never asking for, but for some reason the atheist is allow to free interpret the book which ever way they want.
>inspite of historical narrative
>inspite of blatantly real people
>inspite of contextual clues and language making things concretely understandable
instead philosophizing about the source of evil or really anything else, they just go back to "wallowing" in the same context completely content with suffering. Which was the point of why they interjected to begin with, showing complete contempt for God.
because it proves that this has nothing to do with science its a complete red herring basis saying the discussion is about evidence when the presumption that God doesn't exist is absurd given all the evidence for him is the same evidence athiests were turn around and say proves God doesn't exist.
Its just an arrogative lie.
If you make the arguement that every single issue that atheists raise stems from a trust issue because of religion or the damage dealt to them by life in general, you'll be 99% correct everytime. The book even tells you this happens as a result of people trying to do things God never asked them to do to be forgiven, and that the basis for these things being done was entirely vain self idolization to begin with. Which is exact the arguementation they use against religion, its a satanic strawman, the gospel was never advocating for religion, Jesus annhilated it when he went to the cross. You simply believe the gospel, you're saved.
It's that simple, but despite all the pascal wagering logic and simple moment of faith that its asking for, atheists require a universe of evidence in order to passively believe in something they innately know by using their own skeptic epistemology, that skepticism implies that they already do not believe it, and instead is just a fishhook to demoralize people who do, by feigning openness for "debate", when in actuality all atheists want to do, is publically one up believers over shit the book was never asking for, but for some reason the atheist is allow to free interpret the book which ever way they want.
>inspite of historical narrative
>inspite of blatantly real people
>inspite of contextual clues and language making things concretely understandable
instead philosophizing about the source of evil or really anything else, they just go back to "wallowing" in the same context completely content with suffering. Which was the point of why they interjected to begin with, showing complete contempt for God.
Page 1