Atheists, best friends of Chrsitian Apologetics

 It's quite easy to find atheists making franc admissions they don't know their stuff, or that their views can't be disproved, or that they refuse to accept the evidence. The problem with saying it can't be disproved is that if it's an empirical matter that means it can't be proved either. Here's a quote from a recent harangue about the religious experience studies:


from CARM 3/11/14

meta

...the universality of the experience is proof of the objective existence of what is experienced.
that's where you don't know enough about the issues. Hood is a reputable scientist. He's the top researcher in the world on mystical experience and he is widely recognized as the Chomsky of that field. It's his argument! 

 madmax (carm 3/11/14)

I won't be dragged into your mystical experiences studies. It's been hashed over many times in this forum and I've no motivation whatsoever to rehash it. It takes far more than "reputation" for me to find such things compelling. 

 This very day Deist  demonstrates that when you back him into a corner and prove him wrong he will simply refuse to accept the evidence. The issue here is religoius experience studies. He's still convened after years of proving it wrong, that you can just lie on a study and they have no way of dealing with it; it has to bias the data even if it's just one person. All of that is Just BS. modern scientific polling methods assume 3% lie anyway, so they have 3% margin of error.


The issue of atheist with mystical experience comes into it. Rather than say that atheists having mystical expeince proves it's not God, Deist is  so stupid he tries to deny that they are true atheists who are having it.


 Metacrock;5392119]that is BS! how many do I have to answer this? when the hell are you going to start read what I say? I've told you this over and over again. Hood specially goes out of his way to find atheist to study, illiterate one. It is not a problem for this view point if atheists have this experience, Einstein.

how else in hell do you think he's able to say 'when atheists have this experience they act like the people who bleieve it's God. They still treat it as though it's God." I've mentioned this numerous times. are you ever gonna get it?

you are probably not even reading this.

Deist

This is quite hilarious. Anonymous survey takers, yet we're supposed to believe the man who extolls the virtues of snake handling that he sought out atheists? Are you SERIOUS with this garbage?

Meta

this just highlights your ignorance. you want to pretend like the only study Hood did was on study and he only read his study and nothing else. There is a huge several tons of research on this topic form the 20th century as a whole, but especially the last 50 years. Its' snot all form anonymous survey takers. There are many examples of atheist having it, in many books, atheists themselves write about it, there are studies that aren't done with anonymous respondents. There are qualitative in-depth studies where they know the position of the subject.

you dont' know beans about research.

Meta:

(1) makes no difference whatsoever. as I have already proved. you can't lie your way to validating Stace. even if the people he studied wanted to they could not organize in such a way as to reflect5 the answer that would support Stace's theory. it's too bleeding complex.

Deist:

People lie, fib and fabricate and imagine all manner of things. This is why I don't believe Hood, Stacey or ANONYMOUS survey respondents. I guess my gullibility quotient is not as high as yours.

Meta

I just got through saying you can't lie your way to validating Stace. Some people may have lied on Hood's study (usually about 3% no more that lie on a study) but if it was a majority the study could never validate Stace. it did valuate Stace so they didn't' lie.

if they had a massive organized campaign to lie they could not validate.

(2) remember how I did it here? I challenged he atheist on carm to lie their way to validating my own study. none of you did. you remember? none of you were able to lie in the way that validated it.

Deist

I never took the survey 

Meta

you sure did. so what if you didn't. others did. they couldn't lie their way to it. I can believe you would refrain form doing is you can deny you lost. you are probalby a welcher on bets too.

 (3) That would not matter but the fact of it is they do study atheists. There are atheist who have mystical eDxperience,they react it the way God believers do. Not only does Hood find that by Maslow found

Deist

Riggghhht. Give me their info and I'll guarantee you they were no troo atheist. ahahahahaahahahahahahaahah

Meta
you have no idea what you are saying! you just basically said "nothing can ever count agaisnt my position.If they seem to disprove it then I'll just say they are not true atheists." nothing can ever count, when it seems to disprove it, just bail out. it's not real.

stick your head in the sand. you can't be disproved by the fact, those old facts go away when you stop your ears and go "aalallalalalalalalal" real loud.


AHAHAAHAHAHAHHAHHHHAHAHAHAHAHHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

AHAGHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHHAHHHAHHAHH



Because the concept of God is cultural! use your brain, get your head screwed in. if there is no God there to experience they have to have culture to give them the concept. If that's the case they wont a have a universal set of experiences that are the same. only if there is a reality there they all actually experience that they have the same experiences.

Deist

sorry, Charlie, you lose on this one. With the vague responses of oneness, peace, tranquility..........those vagaries can mean anything and certainly would be expected from ANYONE professing a belief in ANY God.

Of cousre this just show abysmally stupid he is. He can't contorl his hatred so he can't look at the scale and see it's not veg is very specific just becuase it deals with some sense of pace and tranquility that is no reaosn to assume its vague. It's a very specific sort of tranquility. He would miss that question becuase his dumb assumption so his attempt to lie his way to validating would fail.

Notice he bails out of the evidence when you corn him in saying "they are not real atheists." I refuse to refuse to accept the evidence no matter how good it is. If atheists are proved wrong I just define them as not atheists.

classic! don't confuse me with the facts. I know that old telescope is a trick there can't be mountains on the moon



this just in from CARM:

Originally Posted by backup

Obviously the fact that this would mean the text predicted the future is a good reason to dismiss it being about Jesus.

It was written before Jesus was born.

This claim that the suffering servant is a prophecy of Jesus is an incredible stretch and exposes the vast difference between theology and other academic disciplines.

In other words this can't be true because it was I would be wrong.