panelarrow

Welcome to Atheist Tuesday! The INSPY Award

| 61 Comments

Welcome to a new weekly feature that will spotlight silly comments from this blog’s resident atheists, challenges to religious liberties in the U.S., and unbeliever’s opinions in general along with various and sundry articles and videos to help you deal with the atheist/unbeliever/agnostic/unsaved-and desperately-needing-a-Savior person in your life.

This week, I want to post a comment by a particularly snarky atheist who’s been hanging around here for several months: His name is AZOU (they never give their real names) and, unbeknown to him, he’s become something of a hero for the evangelist’s cause. On Sunday he left a comment on my Everyday Club post where members share how well they did on their monthly evangelist goals. Here it is:

“I threw a stack of tracts in the garbage. Sorry, but I prefer the bathroom at work to be tidy! Not the only garbage I’ve tossed in there.”

Many evangelists were encouraged by his comment knowing that God can use everything for His purposes. Paul Latour responded to Azou with this friendly reminder:

Dear Azou,

Thank you for helping us spread the Word of God by heaving gospel tracts into the trash. I have read more than one story of janitors and santitation workers finding these things in trash bins as they cleaned them out, were convicted by what they read, surrendered their life to Christ and were saved. Imagine that: sins forgiven and eternal life granted them in Heaven by what they found in the trash. Isn’t God wonderful?

Your contribution is very much appreciated. Bless you!

PS: Azou,

What are your evangelistic goals for August? Keep up the good work!

The same thought was expressed by SeedSowerJoy:

It’s just possible that the person who empties out the trash in that restroom will see the tracts and read one. Who knows? He may’ve repented and put his trust in the Lord and he would have YOU to thank for providing the information he needed. Just imagine that! God’s Word always end up exactly where He intended.

Thank you.

This comment by Robert Moss reminds all Christians that leaving tracts in bathrooms is a great idea:

When you need help concentrating on doing business in the bathroom I help aide anyone (even atheists ) by leaving reading material…especially Chick Tracts due to their length and good artwork.

And Dede saw this as a rallying cry to do more!:

you and other non-believers will never slow us evangelists down. sorry we are here to stay buddy. and oh btw, there would be a very remote chance that an evangelist would leave a STACK of tracts in a public bathroom…besides there are plenty more where those came from. have a blessed day sir!

So, the honorary sold-out, on-fire encourager award, The Inspy, goes to… AZOU! Congratulations!

WAIT! DID YOU KNOW THAT THERE IS A TRACT CALLED THE “POOPER PEEPER” THAT YOU CAN ACTUALLY TAPE TO THE BATHROOM WALL? CLICK HERE TO SEE IT! (Thanks again, Azou. I almost forgot about it.)

61 Comments

  1. This is encouraging to me to start putting tracts in bathrooms! Thanks AZOU. God’s purposes are never thwarted…To God be the Glory!

  2. In honor of Azou…..(bless you), I will place several tracts in serveral bathroom stalls(on top of the toilet paper dispenser and hand dryer and if the mirror on the wall has enough space between the frame and mirror, I will place one there. Azou might as well repent and put your faith in Christ to rack up the treasures in Heaven. Heck! Your might get a big ol’ crown for encouraging other believers.

  3. Steve wrote:

    (they never give their real names)

    By “they” I assume you mean “people on the internet”, because that’s hardly a thing that only non-believers do. For example, “Bizzle” or (and I understand this could be argued) “SeedSowerJoy”.

    I think it’s far more a generational thing, Steve, instead of an atheist thing.

    In other words, if it’s too loud, you’re too old. 🙂

    Lastly, Robert wrote: “Azou might as well repent and put your faith in Christ to rack up the treasures in Heaven.

    I doubt he’ll take that advice, since you haven’t supported that claim. In other words, it’s not verifiable, and therefore contains the same weight as if a Muslim said “ask forgiveness from Allah so that you may go to paradise after you die” to you.

    Be well,

    Christopher 😉

  4. Steve wrote: “…to help you deal with the atheist/unbeliever/agnostic/unsaved-and desperately-needing-a-Savior person in your life.

    How about EVIDENCE? Supported claims, maybe?

    Or maybe I honestly misunderstand what the point of this was/is.

  5. I won! I won!

    Now, I’d like to take a moment to thank Dawkins, Hitchens, Myers and of course Big Daddy Darwin.

  6. Ooh, fun. I like that Robert Moss appears to approve of chick tracts. Ever read a chick tract, Steve? They’re hilarious. Poe’s law in action, several times over. To quote TVTropes:

    “Apparently, the Catholic Church has a computer database with the name of every Protestant in the world so that when Catholics Take Over The World they’ll kill all of them. … Also, the Catholic Church manipulated Mohamed into creating “the Islam religion”, instigated the Civil War then caused the assassination of Lincoln, formed the Ku Klux Klan (despite the fact that when the KKK was first revived the group was the most powerful anti-Catholic group in the US until it splintered, and much of it is still anti-catholic), created Communism (extremely anti-Catholic) and were responsible for the Holocaust (in which there where many Catholic victims). He also drew a diagram of the underground tunnels in Vatican city where the skulls of the aborted bastard children of priests and nuns are dumped.”

    “People who are out to get you: Sikhs, Satanists, North Koreans, witches, atheists and… anthropologists.”

    Anyway, on topic: everyone here seems to have faith that god wanted Azou to throw those tracts in the bin and convert the janitor by means of wastepaper-carried-propaganda. Reality, meanwhile, tells us that the 99% likely fact of the matter is that the janitor probably didn’t give it a first glance, let alone a second. Or maybe he was already saved, or on the off chance he did go and read it, he was unconvinced and like the vast majority of those who read your tracts, disregarded it as the loony ramblings of an obscure christian sect. I’m not being a cynic here, just a realist: there’s an almost 100% chance all Azou’s actions did was tidy up the bathroom a bit.

    It would seem to be a much more beneficial action to take would be to accept reality as it is and work within those confines. Rather than vainly hoping that the papers in the rubbish had some benefit, why not actually try to present some evidence for your beliefs to non-believers? You keep making these unsupported assertions, in your tracts and in your blogs, in your preaching and even to yourselves, but you never actually present a case in favor of what you believe.

    Of course, I know many you are already thinking the Living Waters company line: “Creation proves a creator,” but that’s just another unsupported assertion: just because you call the universe a creation doesn’t make it one. So please: come up with evidence. Show me some facts that support your position. Repeating “I’m right and you’re wrong” is not a debate-winning strategy.

    I can back up anything I believe with a logical framework that connects to factual, reality based evidence. Can you?

    Cheers,
    James Schumacher. 🙂

  7. How do you know Azou isn’t his real name? Did you just assume it wasn’t?

    Would you have assumed I was using a real name if I used ‘Steve’?

    If you need my real name, ask for it, it’s not a secret. I use my real name on Eric Hovind’s blog, and online my real name is attached to bathtub/bathtubnz a google search would find it. This isn’t some nome de plume, just an online handle that I have used for 14 years.

  8. worth the shot……cannot say i gave a college try…

  9. ‘I help aide anyone (even atheists ) by leaving reading material…’ – next to the condom machine would be a good spot.

    ‘…sorry we are here to stay buddy…’ – just like Buddhism, Hinduism, Mormons, Scientologists and the Taliban?

  10. Nohm wrote: “(they never give their real names)”

    By “they” I assume you mean “people on the internet”, because that’s hardly a thing that only non-believers do. For example, “Bizzle” or (and I understand this could be argued) “SeedSowerJoy”.

    In the context of the post I was referring to the atheists on this blog, who, at least up to now, have never given their real names. It sure is great to see some actual names with the internet handles! Thanks all!

  11. You assume.

  12. Since our atheist friends are kindly giving their names, allow me to reciprocate: My name is Jason.

  13. To the atheists on this blog, this Scripture comes to mind,

    “For although they KNEW God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. Although they claimed to BE WISE, they became fools. . .”-Romans 1:21-22 (caps added by me)

    I know fellow atheists that you do not agree with these verses, but it is you’re God given right not to believe it. I just felt lead by the Holy Spirit to put the truth out there.

    Quasar- you said, “I can back up anything I believe with a logical framework that connects to factual, reality based evidence. Can you?” Interestingly Christianity is rooted in a logical framework that connects to factual, reality based evidence. The problem is not the evidence it is the fact that there are people that do not want to ACCEPT the evidence because they do not like the conclusion. So “evidence” is put forth that looks factual, but if one has an open mind they will see that it is the skin of the truth stuffed with a lie (atheism, cults, anything that is contrary to orthodox biblical Christianity). In previous blog postings I gave plenty of factual, reality based evidences that were presented in a logical framework. But again I believe it is the outcome of where the evidence leads that you do not like (there are other reasons as well). That is sad seeing how this is very serious and deals with your eternal destiny. May the Holy Spirit open blind eyes and lead all the atheists here to repentance and salvation in Jesus Christ. God bless.

    -Thomas

    P.S.—I will say that Quasar did show Chick Tracts in their true light. They have a history of being against the Catholic Church in a big way to the point that it is just ridiculous the things they come up with. Jack Chick, the founder of Chick Tracts historically has had a hatred for the Catholic Church. However, I would like to point out that God can still use these tracts for salvation (they are not a tract I would use, but God can still use them). I have heard of Muslims for example coming to salvation in Jesus from just reading the Quran. Praise God, he is not limited and he always wins!

  14. Thomas wrote:

    To the atheists on this blog, this Scripture comes to mind,

    “For although they KNEW God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. Although they claimed to BE WISE, they became fools. . .”-Romans 1:21-22 (caps added by me)

    Yes, we are aware that Paul wrote that to the Romans. Now, why should a preacher’s opinion from 2000 years ago hold any relevance to me?

    I know fellow atheists that you do not agree with these verses,

    The problem, Thomas, is that I don’t think you understand WHY we “do not agree with these verses” (not the way I’d phrase it, but whatever).

    I just felt lead by the Holy Spirit to put the truth out there.

    Much like the Muslims, you have yet to support your claim that what you’ve written is the truth. Something is not true simply because you say it is.

    Thomas wrote: “Interestingly Christianity is rooted in a logical framework that connects to factual, reality based evidence.

    Please support this claim.

    I think that the problem is that you and Quasar are using two different definitions for the word “logical”. Quasar means “follows the rules of formal logic” while I think you mean “makes sense to me”. That’s been my experience.

    Especially when you next write this:

    The problem is not the evidence it is the fact that there are people that do not want to ACCEPT the evidence because they do not like the conclusion.

    Which is just silly.

    Look, if I go to where I parked my car, and it’s not there, but my side mirror is lying on the ground, do you think my liking or not liking the conclusion of the evidence is relevant in any way?

    If I commit a horrible crime, and I’m brought before a judge, do you think my desire to not like the conclusion of “I’m going to prison” matters whatsoever?

    Thomas, I understand the rules that your God has set up. I understand that, under those rules, I’m going to Hell for eternity. My dislike of the conclusion says NOTHING about whether or not the claim is correct.

    Ok? And even then, if I believed that God existed, I wouldn’t be so incredibly stupid to decide to deny Him, and follow the guy who’s destined to lose big in the end. It’s not complicated. Follow God and win; don’t follow God and lose. I get it. My dislike of the conclusion plays no part and is IRRELEVANT.

    Yet you guys keep bringing this up, as if it means something.

    So “evidence” is put forth that looks factual

    “Looks” is not the same as “is”.

    but if one has an open mind they will see that it is the skin of the truth stuffed with a lie

    Ahhh, a poisoning-the-well fallacy. That’s the whole “rules of logic” thing I mentioned before.

    I have an open mind. If you brought forth evidence that supported your conclusion, and only your conclusion, I’d be on board.

    But if I remember correctly, all you’ve brought up is an allusion to Dembski’s NFL work, which has been shown to be a problem because he doesn’t model evolution accurately.

    In previous blog postings I gave plenty of factual, reality based evidences that were presented in a logical framework.

    I completely disagree.

    But I am willing to read your evidence again. Please present it. Or link to the comments where you presented it before.

    But again I believe it is the outcome of where the evidence leads that you do not like

    Again, how is my liking or not liking of the outcome the least bit relevant?? I am not so stupid to think that “I don’t like the outcome” therefore means “that is not the outcome”.

    My only explanation here is projection on your part.

    (there are other reasons as well).

    Oh? I’m intrigued. What are the other reasons?

    That is sad seeing how this is very serious and deals with your eternal destiny.

    So you say. Unfortunately, you haven’t supported your claim that there in fact is an “eternal destiny” for anyone, much less for me.

  15. You’ll have to show us the evidence again. Real slow this time, because I really don’t consider myself to be all that wise.

  16. Nohm,

    Since my real name IS Joy, I could not be included among those who “never give their real names”.

    Pastor Steve,

    How much trouble would it be for you to change my name on your bog to just “Joy S.” ? (I will even “throw in” my last initial, just to show I am willing to give my real name.)

  17. …congratulations azou! : )

  18. Joy,

    You’ll have to change your name on your end when you log in.

  19. Steve,

    If you go around the internet, including Christian sites (like “Rapture Ready”), you’ll see that using “handles” (i.e., a name that is not your real name) is a common thing.

    It comes from the CB and ham radio days.

    It’s not a domain of atheists. I think that it’s simply an issue that the atheists who post on your blog are people who grew up on the internet more than the Christians who post here.

    It’s not like we’re so concerned as to our identities. I’ve already outed my real first name on here.

    And Joy, that’s why I wrote “(and I understand this could be argued)”, because I assumed your real name was Joy; I was simply talking about the “SeedSower” part. It’s not a complaint, Joy; I was trying to point out to Steve that it’s a common thing to use handles online.

  20. I enjoy the conversations with Atheists. I am glad to have them on board on Stone the Preacher. Your welcome anytime Az. and Nohm to come on down to Knoxville, TN and have a good ol time on Market Square downtown.

  21. Thanks, Robert. 🙂

  22. Is this all i need to do?

  23. Looks like it worked. : + )

  24. Steve, ExPatMatt is a bit upset. Have you forgotten him? I mean, his real name is right in the handle, but you seem to have glossed over it.

  25. Well Nohm here we go again! Once again you ask a lot of questions and I like that about you. I will do my best to answer some of them.

    Nohm said, “Yes, we are aware that Paul wrote that to the Romans. Now, why should a preacher’s opinion from 2000 years ago hold any relevance to me?”
    Answer: I know you do not agree but it is because the Scripture is God breathed. God used Paul by the power of the Holy Spirit to write the Bible. In this case the book of Romans.

    Nohm said, “The problem, Thomas, is that I don’t think you understand WHY we “do not agree with these verses” (not the way I’d phrase it, but whatever).”
    Answer: I think I know where you are coming from. Correct me if I am wrong but you believe that the evidence for God’s non-existence is stronger than the evidence for God’s existence. Though when I look at the evidence I see that the evidence is stronger for the existence of God (though it is all connected to the ultimate evidence of the Holy Spirit). What is going on here? Again I believe the Bible gives a strong answer why, “The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned.” 1 Cor.2:14. This is one insight into what is going on.

    Nohm said, “Much like the Muslims, you have yet to support your claim that what you’ve written is the truth. Something is not true simply because you say it is.”
    Answer: Nohm you are right that something is not true simply because I or you or anyone else says it is true. My words that I write only mean something because they are coming from the Word of God (which you do not accept as from God, but again that does not change the truth) which has been shown through history, science, medicine, archeology, and prophecy to be the truth (the Bible has been proven to be superior over the Quran). Also real quick question, why do you use Muslims and Islam so often in your examples? Just wondering. You bring them up quite often.

    Nohm said, “I think that the problem is that you and Quasar are using two different definitions for the word “logical”. Quasar means “follows the rules of formal logic” while I think you mean “makes sense to me”. That’s been my experience.”
    Answer: You could be right Nohm here that we are not agreeing on the meaning of “logical.” But obviously even when something follows the rules of formal logic, it is still going to have to make sense to you for you to believe it at some point.

    Nohm thank you for correcting me on the word, “except” which should have been “accept.” Writing too fast and I didn‘t catch it.

    Nohm said, “But if I remember correctly, all you’ve brought up is an allusion to Dembski’s NFL work, which has been shown to be a problem because he doesn’t model evolution accurately.”
    Answer: I’m confused how this came up? Can you explain a little further on this comment?

    Nohm said, “But I am willing to read your evidence again. Please present it. Or link to the comments where you presented it before.”
    Answer: They are on this blog and it was you and me I believe that debated. I think the debate is under the “New Atheist” blog section where Pastor Steve debated on camera an “angry” atheist.

    Nohm said, “Again, how is my liking or not liking of the outcome the least bit relevant?? I am not so stupid to think that “I don’t like the outcome” therefore means “that is not the outcome”.
    Answer: This deals with the fact that there is going to be a Judgment Day when you will have to give an account for the life that you have lived. If you have lived a life that rejects God and his Son, that is hell for eternity. It is clear that someone who hates God to the point to where they say he does not existence is not going to want there to be a Judgment Day. Of course this truth does not change just because someone does not believe in it. Its like gravity. Someone can jump off a building and not believe in gravity but it does not change the fact that they will go splat on the ground.

    And finally I said,” There are other reasons as well”. (In connection to why people do not believe the truth of Christianity).
    Nohm said, “Oh? I’m intrigued. What are the other reasons?”
    Answer: This goes back to the spiritual realm or the supernatural. In connection to 1 Cor. 2:14 and other Scriptures that speak on the blindness of those who are not born-again.

    Nohm I want to point out that you brought up a lot of other points that were very interesting. You are always interesting and insightful. I do learn a lot from the information you put forth. What I learn from you God uses to, in the end strengthen my faith in Him. Thank you. But still I must again say that though we broke the Law (the Ten Commandments) Jesus Christ has paid the fine. If you will repent of your sins committed when braking the Ten Commandments and put your trust in Jesus Christ to save you God can forgive your sins and grant you everlasting life. You will then be born-again and this will all for the first time make sense. God bless.

  26. To Garrett,

    Tell ExPatMatt that I miss him; I’m sure he must travel in your circles. He got really mad at me last time, called me a name, picked up all his marbles, and went home.

    You can read his comment for yourself here.

    He didn’t leave very politely.

  27. Probably because you didn’t treat him very politely. I mean, he was being polite and then you accuse him of trolling.

  28. Nohm can’t you just understand that we love our sin so we just pretend God doesn’t exist! I know all the sex, drugs and alcohol I’m not having is totally keeping me from turning towards God.

  29. For the record, I read Ex-Pat Matt’s last comments on that thread and I have to side with our atheist friends. It’s not cool to drop a tract in an open-car window. It’s ok to leave on a windshield, but not INSIDE the car, IMO.

  30. I was going to leave a comment about name usage, but I find it ironic and amusing you would call out ExPatMatt on being impolite in the same thread you charged him with trolling and admitted you would put a tract inside someone’s house if the door was ajar. (Just a hint – that isn’t polite.)

    ==
    Now, onto the names.

    I don’t really understand the issue. On the internet, I find it easier when people use a unique handle rather than a common name.

    On a different site I won’t know one Joy S. from another, but SeedSowerJoy I’ll recognize and know. Her handle is also quite evocative – she’s out there planting seeds of her faith. I also always imagine her as someone that spreads joy.

    Rather than be anonymous by having a far too common name, I use perdita.

  31. Dang – didn’t close the italics (sorry).

  32. Hi Thomas,

    I have a very busy day today, but I’ll try to respond to your comment later this evening.

    Thank you.

  33. Perdita explained the “handle” issue far better than I could have. Thanks!

  34. Well, after that convincing argument from Perdita, I just may go BACK to being SeedSowerJoy. I did come up with that name because that is what Jesus commands us to do-go out and make disciples (aka sow seeds)

  35. One quick thing for Thomas (although I’ll get to the rest of it later):

    Thomas wrote: “Correct me if I am wrong but you believe that the evidence for God’s non-existence is stronger than the evidence for God’s existence.

    You’re completely wrong. Consider yourself corrected. 🙂

    Nutshell: I don’t know what “evidence for God’s non-existence” would be exactly. It’s more an issue of “the claims for God’s existence have multiple major problems and I have yet to see satisfactory answers for them”.

    You have this mindset that atheists claim “God does not exist”, yet I have never said or written those words. What I will say is “your claims for His existence have many problems that I’m not able to overlook.”

    As I’ve said before, it’s not that I reject Him, but that I reject your arguments.

  36. Another quick message for Thomas:

    Regarding the Muslim/Quran questions you had for me, please re-read the post I wrote at https://stonethepreacher.com/2010/06/10/why-christians-dont-argue-with-atheists.html/comment-page-1#comment-12130.

    If you still don’t understand why I can’t accept your claim that “the Bible has been proven to be superior over the Quran” or why I compare Christians to Muslims, I’ll be happy to explain again.

    Lastly, as for the NFL theorem statement that you didn’t understand, I apologize; I had mixed you up with someone else.

    In the meantime, please present the best piece of *objective* evidence that you know about to support either the claim of “God exists” or “Christianity is true” (your choice), and we can take it from there. Because, as it stands now, you keep saying there’s all this evidence, but you’re not presenting any of it. So let’s start with the top one. The best piece of evidence that you have.

  37. Hey Nohm in regards to your top blog, thank you for correcting me on this issue of where you personally stand. I would like to comment on a couple of things you said.

    Nohm said, “Nutshell: I don’t know what “evidence for God’s non-existence” would be exactly. It’s more an issue of “the claims for God’s existence have multiple major problems and I have yet to see satisfactory answers for them”.

    I like your honesty here in this quote Nohm. Correct me if I am wrong but it seems to me most atheists that are the loudest seem to have lot’s of “evidence” for God’s non-existence. But maybe that is a debate for another time. I would like to look at the second part of your statement. I believe that there is ample, reasonable, logical evidence for God‘s existence, but correct me if I am wrong you are looking for evidence that is hard, cold and tangible. If you cannot see it, hear it, taste it, touch it, and feel it, it must not exist because the evidence does not add up or hold up (example of things that are invisible but do exist: atoms, wind, and gravity [I just recently read that a radical scientist is claiming that gravity does not really exist. Key word is “radical” scientist in the article]. And of course God). I do not have all the answers for you. I am still learning when it comes to the evidence for God. There is much more for me to study. I apologize if I have not made that more clear in pervious blogs. In pervious writings I gave the 3 C’s for seeing God (creation, conscience and [Jesus] Christ. The witness of the Holy Spirit is the fourth very important element that ties everything together). You come off as a smart individual and I’m sure that you would agree that you have not studied EVERYTHING there is on this issue. In the end no one will and no one can, know matter how long they live. This is why the fourth element of the Holy Spirit is so important because He is the ultimate proof to the individual that is born-again that God does exist, even if that person does not have ALL the answers. The one thing the born-again person knows is Jesus. That’s all they ever will need because they have a personal relationship with the God of the universe.

    Nohm said, “You have this mindset that atheists claim “God does not exist”, yet I have never said or written those words. What I will say is “your claims for His existence have many problems that I’m not able to overlook.”

    I apologize for this Nohm, you are truly unique when it comes to being an atheist. I have (sadly) not met a lot of atheist, but a few. I stand corrected here. I believe the second half of your statement here was addressed above.

    Nohm said, “As I’ve said before, it’s not that I reject Him, but that I reject your arguments.”

    WOW!!! So if you do not reject Him (meaning God right?) then you have accepted Him? Or you must be meaning that my arguments hinge on your accepting Him? Maybe a little more clarity on this statement Nohm.

    Please remember that though we broke the Ten Commandments (we‘ve all told a lie at some point, taken something that does not belong to us (a thief), taken God‘s name in vain (blasphemy) and/or hated someone and committed murder in our heart) , Jesus Christ has paid the fine through his life’s blood. His death on the cross sealed satan’s and death’s defeat. Now Jesus commands all people to repent and put their trust in Jesus to save them. Please Nohm do that today and God will grant you eternal life by forgiving your sins. Not because of me, not because of you, but because of Him and who He is. A God that gives us what we do not deserve. We deserve hell (because we are evil by nature). But He gives us heaven (because God is good and righteous), only for those who repent and trust Jesus today. God bless.

    Thomas

    P.S.—Maybe the next direction to go is comparing Islam and Christianity? I would be glad to do that Nohm. Always a joy talking to you.

  38. If you all want to skip his lengthy post: Thomas doesn’t give a scrap of evidence. Disappointing. But hey, let’s go over a few things.

    1. The “Three Cs” concept of Creation, Conscience and Christ.

    Creation: No evidence showing that the universe is, in fact, a creation. Even if we could prove this, it (nor the Bible) narrow down the infinite possibilities as to what created the universe.

    Conscience: cannot be observed, measured or interacted with. While people surely have their own sense of right and wrong, one that is pre-programmed by a deity? No evidence.

    Christ: I have no idea what this means. It’s possible he existed, but that alone doesn’t prove anything.

    2. Atheists generally don’t go and try to prove a negative. The burden of proof is squarely upon you for making the claim. Otherwise I could sit here and rattle off gods all day that you’d need to rush out and find evidence that they aren’t real.

    3. Nohm doesn’t know everything, which is why he hasn’t rejected any possibilities. That’s just part of being open-minded. Oh, and he doesn’t reject your god because rejecting imaginary things is pretty silly.

  39. Hello Garrett. I don’t think I have met you before on this blog. Before I yet again go through this I would like to ask you and all the atheists a question. What evidence do you have that strengthens your faith in what YOU believe? God bless.

    -Thomas

    P.S.—Please remember that though we broke the Ten Commandments (we‘ve all told a lie at some point, taken something that does not belong to us (a thief), taken God‘s name in vain (blasphemy) and/or hated someone and committed murder in our heart) , Jesus Christ has paid the fine through his life’s blood. His death on the cross along with his resurrection sealed satan’s and death’s defeat. Now Jesus commands all people to repent and put their trust in Jesus to save them. Please do that today and God will grant you eternal life by forgiving your sins. Not because of me, not because of you, but because of Him and who He is. A God that gives us what we do not deserve. We deserve hell (because we are evil by nature). But He gives us heaven (because God is good and righteous), only for those who repent and trust Jesus today.

  40. You have met before, my dear Thomas. This post is all ABOUT me and my wonderful award.

    I minimize faith where I can, Thomas, so I actively avoid strengthening it. Rather, I prefer to KNOW something via solid evidence. If you ever come up with some evidence for Yahweh, I’d drop my currently held opinions.

    Oh, and that Jesus stuff sounds really despicable. Who thinks killing an innocent for another’s crimes is justice?

  41. Garrett said, “You have met before, my dear Thomas. This post is all ABOUT me and my wonderful award.”

    Ok. It’s all about you and what award? That sounds like a lot of pride coming from you. What award are you refering too may I ask?

    Garrett said, “I minimize faith where I can, Thomas, so I actively avoid strengthening it. Rather, I prefer to KNOW something via solid evidence.”

    I’m afraid Garrett you have faith and that faith is based on some kind of evidence. What that evidence is, you have yet to tell me. At least I have given you SOME KIND of evidence, which of course you have rejected. What is the evidence that backs up your faith?

    Garrett said, “If you ever come up with some evidence for Yahweh, I’d drop my currently held opinions.”

    I highly doubt this statement. I have given evidence which you have totally rejected. Correct me if I am wrong but this is your attempt at trying to look open minded and rational. But your actions speak louder than your words.

    Garrett said, “Oh, and that Jesus stuff sounds really despicable. Who thinks killing an innocent for another’s crimes is justice?”

    “For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For it is written:
    ‘I will destroy the wisdom of the wise; the intelligence
    of the intelligent I will frustrate.'”

    God bless,
    Thomas

  42. This is the actual post I wanted to put up:

    Garrett said, “You have met before, my dear Thomas. This post is all ABOUT me and my wonderful award.”

    Ok. It’s all about you and what award? That sounds like a lot of pride coming from you. What award are you referring too may I ask?

    Garrett said, “I minimize faith where I can, Thomas, so I actively avoid strengthening it. Rather, I prefer to KNOW something via solid evidence.”

    I’m afraid Garrett you have faith and that faith is based on some kind of evidence. What that evidence is, you have yet to tell me (I have debate with other atheists on this blog that have really just attacked what I have said. But I do not remember a time yet when I have seen what you (atheists) believe laid out in a orderly fashion). At least I have given you SOME KIND of evidence, which of course you have rejected. What is the evidence that backs up your faith?

    Garrett said, “If you ever come up with some evidence for Yahweh, I’d drop my currently held opinions.”

    I highly doubt this statement. I have given evidence which you have totally rejected. Correct me if I am wrong but this is your attempt at trying to look open minded and rational. But your actions speak louder than your words. This goes back to a question I have asked before, what evidence are you looking for? I believe I have asked this question before from other atheists on this blog, but maybe you can clear things up for me Garrett. (There was another atheist on the blog that told me what it would take for him to believe in God. But I would still like to here from you).

    Garrett said, “Oh, and that Jesus stuff sounds really despicable. Who thinks killing an innocent for another’s crimes is justice?”

    “For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For it is written:
    ‘I will destroy the wisdom of the wise; the intelligence
    of the intelligent I will frustrate.'”- 1 Corinthians 1:18-19

    God bless,
    Thomas

  43. Thomas, a few quick things:

    1. Arguments are not evidence.

    2. All one atheist has in common with any other atheist is that both lack belief in god(s). That’s all we have in common.

    3. We, in general, do not have “faith”, as the book of Hebrews describes it.

    4. As for evidence of my beliefs, it depends which belief you’re talking about. My evidence for gravity is a falling pen. My evidence for evolution is ERVs. So you’ll have to point to something specific.

    5. Maybe people attack what you say, and reject what you say, simply because your arguments are fallacious? Have you at least considered that possibility?

    6. As for what evidence is needed to believe, wouldn’t God know that? If so, it appears that he’s not that concerned with us atheists believing, right? Because obviously things like “look at the trees around you, that can’t be by accident” isn’t working.

    7. You have yet to show your best piece of evidence that I asked for. You have only presented (bad) arguments, such as “the three C’s”. Please read item #1 in this list again.

    8. You seem to know common theistic arguments, but (as I’ve mentioned before), you don’t seem to have ever researched their counter-arguments, because it would make sense for you to handle those first. But you don’t. In fact, you don’t seem to notice that “Creation requires a Creator” assumes the very conclusion you’re trying to reach.

    9. Maybe it’s not an “attempt at trying to look open minded and rational”. Maybe it *is* simply being open minded and rational. Considering how off the mark your definition of “atheist” is, it’s possible that you’re so set on how we’re supposed to be, based on your preconceptions, that you’re not paying enough attention to how we actually are.

    10. If you want to know what most people who call themselves “atheists” think, please read Wikipedia’s article on Secular Humanism. While it’s true that not all atheists are secular humanists, I would think that most atheists you’ll deal with — especially on this blog — are secular humanists. Again, if you want to see the evidence that backs these opinions, you’ll have to point out the specific opinions.

  44. Nohm- insightful, straight-forward, don’t agree with everything, thank you for the post. God bless and please remember:

    Though we broke the Ten Commandments (we‘ve all told a lie at some point, taken something that does not belong to us (a thief), taken God‘s name in vain (blasphemy) and/or hated someone and committed murder in our heart), Jesus Christ has paid the fine through his life’s blood. His death on the cross along with his resurrection sealed satan’s and death’s defeat. We are guilty in God’s courtroom (that’s hell for eternity), but Jesus settled the fine to give us heaven for eternity. Now Jesus commands all people to repent and put their trust in Jesus to save them. Please Nohm do that today and God will grant you eternal life by forgiving your sins. Not because of me, not because of you, but because of Him and who He is. A God that gives us what we do not deserve. Please repent and trust Jesus. Today is the day of salvation.

    P.S.—I like your idea of doing the counter-arguments first then go from there (I keep forgetting to do that). I will do that in the near future, because I am sure we will be dealing with these issues again real soon.

  45. Nohm and any other atheists- What is your best evidence that God does not exist? Just one best piece of evidence please.

    -Thomas

  46. Thomas, just because you post evidence doesn’t mean the evidence is good. If you feel I have poor reasoning for rejecting your evidence or there is evidence I’ve yet to address, feel free to speak up.

    Oh, and very cute posting an irrelevant Bible verse in response to your religion’s warped sense of justice.

  47. Thomas, the burden of proof is on you. Our best evidence is the lack of evidence. Proving a negative is difficult and would require you to provide evidence against an infinite number of possibilities. Also, few atheists claim that there are no gods, but rather that there is no evidence yet to support believing in any number of them.

    Do you even listen to us? Are you half-literate: capable of writing but not reading? This is big letter time.

    I HAVE SAID THE ABOVE ONCE BEFORE IN THIS SAME POST. YOU ARE NOW JUST IGNORING US AND IT’S RATHER RUDE.

    Do I need to make a list of Christians to not bother with? Richard and you don’t seem interest in dialogue at all, but rather just talk at us like we’re children.

  48. Thomas Moore asks: “What is your best evidence that God does not exist? Just one best piece of evidence please.

    I will happily supply it as soon as you give me your evidence that you don’t owe me $100,000.

    So pay up. 🙂

    When you understand why what I just wrote is wrong, you’ll understand why your question is wrong.

    I have never claimed that there is no God. I have only claimed that His believers do not supply sufficient evidence for His existence, and that their arguments contain multiple logical fallacies.

    The burden of proof is on the person making the claim. You claim that a God exists. Therefore, the burden of proof is on you.

    I’ll write a comment later today which gives a “snarky” list of evidence “that God doesn’t exist”, but please understand that I won’t be serious about it… because the burden of proof is on you.

    Lastly, I used to be a Christian, and so I know of the rules that you keep posting. I won’t tell you to stop posting your warnings, just that they fall on deaf ears because I am not a theist or a Christian now.

    I do “repent” of my “sins”, I just don’t ask forgiveness from a being that I currently lack belief in. Makes sense?

  49. Thomas wrote: “P.S.—I like your idea of doing the counter-arguments first then go from there (I keep forgetting to do that). I will do that in the near future, because I am sure we will be dealing with these issues again real soon.

    If you do only one piece of research, please investigate the criticisms of Paley’s Watchmaker argument, of which “Creation points to a Creator” is a derivative. If you have counter-arguments to those criticisms, I’ll be happy to look at them.

    After that, look at the criticisms of the claim “Jesus was resurrected” (since that’s your third “C” argument). In the past you have just made a bald assertion of this, and the only evidence you supply are the names of people like Josephus (of which there are also criticisms of the part that you’re referring to).

    Every one of your “C” arguments has well-known criticisms. I have yet to see a good counter-argument to any of these criticisms, and I am of the opinion that the criticisms make drastically more sense than the three “C” arguments.

  50. Thomas, as for your consistent warnings about how we should believe, I’ll point you to this comment I wrote to you a while ago.

    Please read it again.

  51. Garrett- You have a lot of passion for what you believe and I respect you for that. Of course I do not agree with you, but you have conviction. I am sorry you feel like you have been ignored or talked down upon. That is not, of course what I am aiming for. I just must give the truth and that can come off as harsh at times. I continue to learn through reading and study on these issues, which will take the rest of my life (however long that is) to learn on this issue of God’s existence and presenting the evidence in the best way possible.

    Nohm- Thank you for your posts. You are a little easier to dialogue with than Garrett (who seems a little angry). You have shed more light on what atheism is. You have cleared some things up for me. I have said in the past that I have not had many dealings with atheists. Just here and there when I have gone out witnessing. The atheists I did run into just wanted me to know they were an atheist and then they took off. I wanted to talk, but did not get the chance. I thank you for speaking to me.

    There are other comments that the both of you (Garrett and Nohm) made that I would like to address but because of time I can not. I am sure we will have run ins again real soon on this website. I do believe that both of your claims that your best evidence for God’s non-existence is my lack of evidence is faulty to say the least (I will say that one of your fellow atheists on this blog did do a run down of what it would take for him to believe in God. It was quite a list of all the miracles for him to believe. I give him credit for giving something). I gave logical, rational reasons for God’s existence and all you gave was a “not enough or not good evidence.” I just think that is weaker in the long run then someone who actually gives solid reasons for what he or she believes, in this case God’s existence. Yes there are counter-arguments that need to be addressed, but in the long run they are small when standing next to the evidence. The bottom line is the saying, “The man who has had the experience is not at the mercy of the man who has an argument.” I know that God exist because I have met Him and have a relationship with Him. How that all works I will spend the rest of my life learning and finding out. I know Jesus Christ as my Lord and Savior by the power of the Holy Spirit living within me. How that all works, I do not know and will never fully know or understand. One day I will know more and even then there will still be much to learn about God in eternity. God bless!
    and please remember:

    Though we broke the Ten Commandments (we‘ve all told a lie at some point, taken something that does not belong to us (a thief), taken God‘s name in vain (blasphemy) and/or hated someone and committed murder in our heart), Jesus Christ has paid the fine through his life’s blood. His death on the cross along with his resurrection sealed satan’s and death’s defeat. We are guilty in God’s courtroom (that’s hell for eternity), but Jesus settled the fine to give us heaven for eternity. Now Jesus commands all people to repent and put their trust in Jesus to save them. Please do that today and God will grant you eternal life by forgiving your sins. Not because of me, not because of you, but because of Him and who He is. A God that gives us what we do not deserve. Please repent and trust Jesus. Today is the day of salvation.

    -Thomas

  52. Thomas wrote: “I do believe that both of your claims that your best evidence for God’s non-existence is my lack of evidence is faulty to say the least

    That is not what either Garrett or myself wrote. Please re-read our comments. I explicitly explained that I have no need for evidence of God’s non-existence, since I don’t make claim that there is no God. You make the claim that there is one, and so you must support that claim.

    Again, if I said “prove to me that you don’t owe me $100,000!!”, what would be your response?

    Thomas wrote: “I gave logical, rational reasons for God’s existence

    No, you decidedly did not. You gave arguments that contained multiple logical fallacies, which is obviously not a “logical reason”. Your arguments operated from axioms which Garrett and I have no reason to have, and they referenced non-objective non-testable evidence, so they weren’t “rational” either.

    This goes back again to what the word “logical” means, and I argue that you continue to use it incorrectly, due to your inexperience with formal logic.

    Thomas wrote: “and all you gave was a “not enough or not good evidence.”

    This is not true. I can point you again to the “Arguing with Atheists” thread where I dealt with your arguments, and my responses were a bit more than “not good enough.”

    I’ll also throw in again that arguments are not evidence. Arguments are used to explain evidence in order to support your claims.

    Thomas wrote: “I just think that is weaker in the long run then someone who actually gives solid reasons for what he or she believes, in this case God’s existence.

    As I said, you’ll have to be specific for what “beliefs” you’re talking about, and I’ll be happy to give you solid reasons.

    As for God’s existence, the burden of proof is on you. It is not incumbent on me to provide evidence for His non-existence, just like you don’t have to provide evidence that you don’t owe me $100,000.

    I only have to provide evidence for the claims that I make, and I don’t make the claim “God does not exist” (seriously, how many times have I written this now??). I claim that you haven’t presented evidence, only arguments, and those arguments contain multiple logical fallacies.

    Thomas wrote: “Yes there are counter-arguments that need to be addressed,

    Yes, that’s been my point. You still haven’t addressed them.

    but in the long run they are small when standing next to the evidence.

    Such evidence that you’ve talked about a lot but have never presented, even after I’ve asked you multiple times.

    And how can you claim that “they are small” when you haven’t even dealt with them at all??? I’m still not convinced you even know what the counter-arguments are!

    Thomas wrote: “I know that God exist because I have met Him and have a relationship with Him.

    Ok, and I don’t because I haven’t and I don’t. So where does this leave us? I should believe based solely on your say-so?

    Thomas wrote: “Though we broke the Ten Commandments…

    Yes, and the Quran says that you’re going to hellfire because you worship the Trinity. Why should I believe you over them? Why should I believe the Bible over the Quran? Why should I believe what any ancient holy book says?

    Yes, I know… all that evidence that you talk about but never present.

  53. Nohm- I guess on certain things we just may always hit a brick wall. Though I do apologize if I have come off like I do not remember what you said in the past on certain things. Some things, yes I have forgotten simply because I do not get on this blog and just reread everything all the time. You must get on this blog quite often. Again I apologize I will try to do better in the future on that. But many things I do remember and have learned a lot with the atheists on this blog. Now I would like to address a counter-argument to each of the 3 C’s for you now. This is just one argument (one does have two) at the moment.

    Creation- God created every thing we see. He is the Creator of all things seen and unseen. So who created God then? The Bible makes it clear that God is the uncreated one (the Beginning and the End [Alpha and Omega]). This is where are human mind cannot fully wrap itself around the uncreated one. One day it will make a little more sense for those who go to heaven.

    Conscience- God is the creator of the conscience, the knowledge of right and wrong. But isn’t the conscience just a man-made construct to help keep society together? If this is true that the conscience is just something that has formed over time than there truly is no right or wrong. At one time murder would have been a right. Now through time and trial murder is a wrong. But deep down no human being truly believes this. There has to be an intrinsic element to right and wrong. I contend that this intrinsic element is good because wrong or evil (not everything that is wrong is necessarily evil but for this I am using them together) is a deviation from good (anyone would agree that rape, murder and theft is wrong. But what makes those things wrong? Because we understand by our God-given conscience that those evil things stray from what is good). That intrinsic good has to ultimately be God who is the very definition of good. God creates a solid ground for morality to rest on.

    Christ Jesus- Jesus showed humanity who God is in the flesh, face to face in a intimate way. But how do we know that Jesus really even existed? This is an unbelievable claim simply because of ALL the evidence we have for the existence for Jesus. Only the most fringe historians would say that he did not exist. The evidence is overwhelming for his existence (biblical and outside the Bible). But what about the resurrection, there is no way that could have taken place? There are many good explanations for the resurrection of Jesus Christ. One of them being the fact of Jesus’ disciples. Why would these disciples one minute run when Jesus was arrested and then a short time later begin to proclaim that he was alive? They had nothing to gain from it except death. And that is exactly what happened to almost all of the disciples. If it was a lie that they came up with they would have never, no one would ever, die willingly for a lie. But they did die, declaring to the end that Jesus was resurrected. And they were not the only ones who saw Jesus alive after his death.

    Nohm this is just the beginning on these three areas for the existence of God. I knew that the fourth “C” (the supernatural element) of the Holy Spirit would be the hardest for you (one reason) simply because in your mind I am not a credible source so to speak. But I tell you again that I have a relationship with the living God (I KNOW HIM) and that I was once blind but now I see. Again how it all works I do not fully understand or know, but it did work, it does work and I know that God’s power, his Holy Spirit will continue to work in my life.

    Nohm I just want to continue to thank you for the dialogue. I am learning so much. You may not realize it but God is using you and you don’t even know it. He is using you to strengthen me in my faith in Him (God) for future furthering of His Kingdom by the power of his Holy Spirit. For that I am grateful to you and your time. God bless.

    Thomas

    P.S.— I would like to get into dialogue on the superiority of Christianity over Islam. As of writing right now I do not have time. But something I would like to do soon. So much to go over. I have to take one step at a time. Talk to you later.

  54. Tom, I’m off work tomorrow. Have Yahweh swing by around 5pm or so and we can chat over dinner. These blogs can be great for networking, and it’s fantastic that I’ve encountered someone who’s met Yahweh.

    If that doesn’t work, we can just exchange schedules and work something out. I know he’s a busy dude, but since he apparently works outside the laws of time, I’m guessing he can pencil me in.

    Looking forward to it!

  55. Oh, and I am relieved that everything will make sense AFTER the crucial judgement that potentially sends us to eternal damnation.

  56. Thomas, I want to hit on a point really quickly, before I can get to the rest of your comment:

    But how do we know that Jesus really even existed? This is an unbelievable claim simply because of ALL the evidence we have for the existence for Jesus. Only the most fringe historians would say that he did not exist. The evidence is overwhelming for his existence (biblical and outside the Bible).

    1. I do not make the claim “Jesus did not exist”. You are making the claim that he did. As I have mentioned before, if we’re talking about “street preacher” Jesus, then I have no problem with that claim. If we’re talking “divine superpowers” Jesus, then I have an issue.

    2. Here again you do exactly what I mentioned before. You keep saying that there’s all this evidence, but note that at no point did you provide any. You make claim after claim after claim with no effort put into supporting them. If the evidence is so overwhelming, why didn’t you present some of it?

    If I thought that the evidence was overwhelming for something, that means it would be easier for me to present that evidence. What I wouldn’t do is keep claiming there’s a bunch of it out there, poisoning the well by calling people “fringe historians” without showing any indication that you’ve read their research, and then never actually detailing out any evidence.

    That’s my main problem. And that doesn’t even touch on my opinion that your selected “counter-arguments to the 3 C’s” are the biggest softballs I’ve ever seen. Your reply to the Watchmaker Argument criticisms was particularly difficult for me to keep my jaw from the floor.

    I really apologize how I’m coming off here, Thomas. I’m honestly trying to avoid being mean and I’m trying to continue this dialogue. But it seems like you’re not actually researching what non-believers actually say and argue, and that you’re getting all of this info from “how to argue against an atheist” on Christian websites.

    Believe me, I do understand this. I was also once taught (during evangelism classes) how to dialogue with imaginary atheists. The problem with that is, you’re trained to talk with imaginary people.

    We non-believers are not imaginary ones you’re taught about.

  57. Gah, let’s try that again:

    Thomas, I want to hit on a point really quickly, before I can get to the rest of your comment:

    But how do we know that Jesus really even existed? This is an unbelievable claim simply because of ALL the evidence we have for the existence for Jesus. Only the most fringe historians would say that he did not exist. The evidence is overwhelming for his existence (biblical and outside the Bible).

    1. I do not make the claim “Jesus did not exist”. You are making the claim that he did. As I have mentioned before, if we’re talking about “street preacher” Jesus, then I have no problem with that claim. If we’re talking “divine superpowers” Jesus, then I have an issue.

    2. Here again you do exactly what I mentioned before. You keep saying that there’s all this evidence, but note that at no point did you provide any. You make claim after claim after claim with no effort put into supporting them. If the evidence is so overwhelming, why didn’t you present some of it?

    If I thought that the evidence was overwhelming for something, that means it would be easier for me to present that evidence. What I wouldn’t do is keep claiming there’s a bunch of it out there, poisoning the well by calling people “fringe historians” without showing any indication that you’ve read their research, and then never actually detailing out any evidence.

    That’s my main problem. And that doesn’t even touch on my opinion that your selected “counter-arguments to the 3 C’s” are the biggest softballs I’ve ever seen. Your reply to the Watchmaker Argument criticisms was particularly difficult for me to keep my jaw from the floor.

    I really apologize how I’m coming off here, Thomas. I’m honestly trying to avoid being mean and I’m trying to continue this dialogue. But it seems like you’re not actually researching what non-believers actually say and argue, and that you’re getting all of this info from “how to argue against an atheist” on Christian websites.

    Believe me, I do understand this. I was also once taught (during evangelism classes) how to dialogue with imaginary atheists. The problem with that is, you’re trained to talk with imaginary people.

    We non-believers are not imaginary ones you’re taught about.

  58. Nohm and Garrett, thanks again for your info. You both have taught me many things during this time. God bless!

    -Thomas

  59. You’re welcome, Thomas, but I honestly was looking forward to what evidence you were going to present.

  60. @Nohm. No one here can give you any physical proof, and while you may think this makes their claim untrue, I can explain why that is not the case.

    If, for example, I were to tell you about Algebra, and you knew nothing about Algebra, the only way for you to prove that Algebra exists would be to gain firsthand knowledge of Algebra for yourself. Once you did, you would find that the textbooks written on Algebra are correct, as you could work out the proofs for yourself, line by line. Without knowledge of Algebra, the lines of numbers and letters would just look like nonsense.

    The way to prove God is that same kind of firsthand knowledge. Once you know him, then you can put others to the proof, and know whether what they are saying and what they are quoting or writing is really from God. Simply saying, the burden of proof is on others is like saying, Algebra may exist, but I have no desire to learn it and until someone can somehow make Algebra manifest itself in a miraculous way or force itself into my brain, I will not believe in it. Sad news, you would never know Algebra and never have any proof of it. As someone who knows both, I can tell you that knowing God is better than knowing Algebra, and if you want to discuss it more I can tell you why.

  61. No one here can give you any physical proof

    Okay. Although I’d ask, “why not?”

    and while you may think this makes their claim untrue

    I don’t; there are far bigger issues that make me think their claims are untrue.

    For an example of a “far bigger issue”, it’s my opinion that their claims are not internally consistent.

    Kinda like the tv show “Lost”.

    The way to prove God is that same kind of firsthand knowledge.

    Okay. What is the best way to gain this firsthand knowledge? Every explanation that’s been given to me has not worked.

    Simply saying, the burden of proof is on others is like saying, Algebra may exist, but I have no desire to learn it and until someone can somehow make Algebra manifest itself in a miraculous way or force itself into my brain, I will not believe in it.

    I completely disagree. The burden of proof is on others because those others are the ones making the claim that God exists. Not just that, but that I should follow His particular rules, and not those of the gods that other people worship (such as Allah).

    I never said that I have no desire to learn it.

    I certainly never said “until someone can somehow make God manifest itself in a miraculous way or force Himself into my brain, I will not believe in Him.”

    Those are straw-men.

    As I asked above, what is the way to gain this knowledge?

    For the record, if the answer is anywhere along the lines of “humbly repent, read the Bible, follow the Holy Spirit, etc”… been there, done that.

    Have you repented to Allah, read the holy Quran, and followed the five pillars? Why or why not?

    If the answer is “no”, then why should someone do something that you yourself don’t do?

    If the answer is “yes”, and you came away not believing in Allah, then you and I are in the same spot, only with regards to your God in my case.

Leave a Reply

Required fields are marked *.