Club has perverted Atheism with his Theistic beliefs! He’s wrong!
Sagesound shouldn’t have to make a poll, Club buried his own grave…
0voters
11.27.06.1704
It’s a farce and a disturbing attempt to make “real” atheism less credible than it actually appears to be. What I’m curious about is: why the animosity? Why not just let it be and get on with your life?
Oh and another thing I said my opinion was that atheism is garbage as I see it. The one time I don’t posit something as an absolute for all, you do. Thanks.
And you still missed the point that I tried atheism, I truly did. I found it very pleasing at first, but I found it was a miserable way to live compared to theism, I found, I found.
And when I gave atheistic arguments I was sincere as I could possibly be about arguing for atheism. If I did a bad job oh well, I guess were not all cut out to be atheist, but no need to create a post like this.
Member “Club29” was never an ‘atheist’ during his time posting on ILP, as far as I can see (after reading most of his posts), and thusly didn’t possess the quality ‘atheism’ at any time.
His deep seeded belief in christian theology shines through regardless of the actual topic.
Lol, ah yes. Then we can concur you atheist have never truly been theist! Would it be ok for me to argue that direction as well?
I’m not sure what quality I needed. I argued against God’s existence. I don’t see how my christian theology shines through regardless of the topic, I felt my understanding of my own thoughts against God shown through. I give you howd I think If I was atheist, if I argued against God.
I mean you have a very structured and particular worldview, and that it is probably easier for others to see than for yourself. The self is often the hardest thing to examine, and near impossible to examine objectively.
Even in your time pretending to be an atheist, the way you said things and expressed ideas was from a very marked theistic position.
For example, the first post I read of yours was you arguing for atheism, and it took about 5 lines to realize it was a hoax. You can’t be what you are not, and you are not a convincing actor
It wasn’t a “hoax.” That would imply that you were deliberately lying. What I think is that you are simply incapable of getting into the mindset of the atheist, so rather than a hoax it was a sincere attempt that had zero chance of success.
This is quite the task you ask of me. There are a lot of intangibles.
I could deconstruct one of your posts, I suppose. Choose any argument you have created for atheism and I will attempt to deconstruct it so that you might see what I am talking about.
So my argument that we aren’t truly free to make choices about what we believe is a horrible argument. Man… I would have never figured.
Actually… I still believe I’m correct in that argument, even at this point you say I can’t understand atheism. I guess I truly can’t, and there’s no set standard of how you should understand it. I guess I really can’t make the choice to be atheist if I wanted it, it’s just beyond my comprehension.
This is really easier said than done, I suppose. It is just the general overtones you exude, such as.
1: You seem to think there must be an objective system of morality. Further, you seem to think lack of morality must be an ongoing problem with those that don’t believe. This is a non-problem to an actual atheist, who generally has no such problem.
2: You categorize ‘atheists’ as a unit, a belief system. This is something no real atheist does. Atheists are united only in their lack of belief.
These in particular are distinctly religious views of atheism, which shine through in many of your posts. There is more, but it is more subtle. Sufice it to say you probably didn’t fool anyone.
I think you made an honest effort, but can you see that had you genuinely embraced atheism at any point there would have been no discussion of that? You would simply have shrugged at the statements of theists and said nothing, because a genuine atheist has nothing to say about theism. For an atheist, any discussion about theism is irrelevent.
Again, I think you gave it your best intentions. Sometimes, we don’t always get the right questions…
I wasn’t trying to fool anyone, that’s not my belief to do so, but I guess you’d believe that though if I was being atheist at this time.
I felt as an atheist there was no way to posit objective morals, as atheist, theist, w/e. So my actual atheism had such a problem, and many atheist agree that an objective morality does not exist, so don’t unit them.
This argument came from a disbelief of why God couldn’t exist, it’s still lies deep within my head and I still agree to it some, but I can’t be totally sure it’s correct and my theism still outways my atheism. I just left my theism behind when I tried this and delved into all my atheistic thoughts, but it wasn’t enough atheism to fuel the fire I guess.
“Mind, stretched by a new knowledge, can never return to its prior form”.
Club29, having experienced God, or having experienced the beauties and qualities of God, can not believe that there is no God. This is true of me too as I have experienced the qualities of God.
Defending atheism is not convincing enough if one’s mind has the knowledge of God no matter how small that knowledge is. We cannot know all of God. We are only experiencing a small part of God’s creation.
Desire is will. When we will we spend our energy towards a thing that we desire. Atheists do not desire or do not will themselves to know God.
I wish the atheists could experience what theists or pantheists experienced but again it is in the person’s will. Only if the person desires to learn and will himself to learn.
Club, there is something I have been itching to nail you on which would serve a purpose of two possible results. The first result being to prove you to be a liar and further validating my claim that was made with evidence provided on my first post in this thread. The second result is a corollary that would stem from the potential assumption that if you truly are not lying, then you would be, as you would put it, damned.
Now to answer why I’ve made this thread. To be honest, Club, I’m disgusted by your attempts, or so I believe them to be, to receive everyone on this site that you truly did briefly become an atheist. This thread exists to expose you with factual evidence created by your own hands. If you however prove that you have not received and that you were telling the truth the whole time (which seems unlikely), then this thread would serve the purpose of exposing you as a blasphemer of your faith who apparently will not confront that fact (if it becomes fact).
So now to the test…
Oh Club… how sad this will be.
So… let’s consider, for the purpose of this exposure, that Christianity is entirely true (as Club believes it to be), and Heaven and Hell most certainly exists. According to the Bible, the only real unforgivable sin that God will condemn you to Hell for is if you doubt the Holy Spirit. (Luke 12:10 & Mark 3:29)
Now, if you truly were an Atheist, you would have to deny the Holy Spirit as well as the rest of the Holy Trinity. Why? Because by definition, an Atheist is a person who disbelieves in the existence of a deity. By not believing, you automatically deny the Holy Spirit. RESULT = You committed the only unforgivable sin that automatically grants you a one-way ticket to HELL, no considerations. Yup, go directly to jail… do not pass go, and certainly do not collect an eternity of bliss but an eternity of torment.
Of course… you can come out and say that you were only “pretending” to be an Atheist and that you lied that you were really one since you would never consciously deny the Holy Spirit. If you do that, then you will have proved my claim. Do it not, and you will go to the Hell you believe in after you die.
Club, the fallacy in your failed attempts for athiesm is this: atheists plain and simple just don’t give a (pardon my french) shit. An argument for atheism is absurd and impossible. You are trying to argue something that does not exist. Atheist just don’t believe god exists, end of story. There’s nothing more to it. It’s a very simplistic viewpoint that needs no further explanation.
