Would definitive proof of God convince atheists?



Excellent points.

Adding to that, I want to point out this out:

[part 1 of 4]

If someone had the attitude (as I myself admit to having) that they don't want to be a servile bootlicker and forever-child-dependent to a magical Daddy,


and extra-especially if that Daddy Dom meets EVERY SINGLE ONE of the Diagnostic Criteria for malignant Clinical Narcissism and Psychopathy,

and who is offering to transform every sufficiently ego-flattering, cowering sycophant with the "reward" of:

 rendering each such person forever-after INCAPABLE of ever-again having an unapproved thought, feelings, or action (but pre-plans to gaslight about it, by saying those Stepford Wife-Children still have "Free Will"), ... 
 


[part 2 of 4]

 I do not WANT the rumor-promised reward for that "Find The Real Daddy" contest (a contest with really bad odds anyways. So we should really be calling it a lottery).

HOWEVER, ... my "dedicated disinterest" in being a child-bride to a magical Psycho, has nothing whatsoever to do with whether or not I think such an Entity exists in reality. 


 



[part 3 of 4]

I am perfect fine with being presented with good arguments and evidence that "He" exists.

And if that's ever presented, I'd be perfectly willing to admit whichever-Entity has good evidence for existing ... has good evidence for existing.

If that evidence is impressive enough, I'd even be perfectly willing to say "Oh wow. He exists".

And then I'd still say "But I want no part of it, *IF* that Entity is being accurately described by Christian Extortionist Authoritarians. 
 
[part 4 of 4]

Being willing to admit X, or Y, or Z -Entity(ies) exist is an entirely separate matter from wanting to have X, or Y, or Z relationship-paradigm with any entity.

Nobody rejects the "existence" of (whichever)-Entity based on "doesn't want to lick that Entity's throne until it sparkles".




Instead, people (and I'm willing to bet this is really ALL non-theists) would be willing to ACCEPT good evidence (including good arguments) that (whichever)-Entity exists

 (at least within the context of their individual cognitive capacity to weigh evidence; which has nothing to do with moral character).

And then they'd just decide separately if the advertised/rumored relationship-paradigm is one they want to sign up for.









Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Why "Christianity didn't do NOTHING wrong"

Image
 An Introduction To Christianity.  Why "Christianity didn't do NOTHING wrong" Our journey begins with this YouTube video. My own thoughts about that video are mixed. It makes great points. Granted,  rather than having the old man speak for himself,  the more accurate illustration would be several old men claiming (without evidence) to speak for "The" Old Man. However, I am reminded that Darkmatter2525 doesn't usually bother to clarify this either; since everyone familiar with these issues already realizes how it really works.  --  In response to this short video,  one man (a Christian) wrote: " In the actual story the "children" ran through the house like nothing happened and lived of him, destroying and subjugating him I'm talking about the Roman pagans of course, and how Christianity humanized the world by reforming whatever was that Christianity didn't do NOTHING wrong" --- I am translating that to mean this: --- "In th...
Read more

Responding To Ryan Pauly (Christian Fundamentalist) About De-Conversion And Secularism

Image
  These statements (made by you (Ryan) and your guest) are building upon a narrative which is incredibly unreasonable and unethical. First, you frame the narrative as: 'rather than allow "Scripture" to tell us who we are...' This one almost slipped under the radar. The fair and honest way of saying that part of your rhetoric would be: "Rather than allowing 1. my subjectively chosen sect's 2. subjective interpretation of 3. our subjectively chosen religious texts tell you who you are ... ". Although, even that wording wouldn't be totally fair. Since HUMANITY does actually NOT instinctively know that your sub-niche religious faction even exists; nor that your over-arching religious umbrella (or "theme") of "Christianity" is anything they should give attention or credence to. In fact, even the people who are leaving your specific religious sub-culture are only ACTUALLY leaving because they REALIZED it doesn't a...
Read more

The War On Christmas. Is that a real thing? And is it really a war against Jesus?

Image
 Today, our journey begins here.   In reply,  someone wrote: "Unfortunately this was true at one point, and would still be if the people with common sense fighting back." --- In reply, I said: There's still no "war on Christmas". Everyone can still say "Merry Christmas". Christian fundamentalists still enjoy pretending to be oppressed." [Note: I made some other observations; offering many points of common ground. However, Kelly didn't really want to talk about any of that. So I've decided not to include it here]  ---- In reply, they said:  "you apparently have forgotten when many companies forbid their employees from saying Merry Christmas, and when companies turned away from Merry Christmas and using the generic Happy Holidays. Apparently you missed our current Vice President and her speech on how terrible it was to say Merry Christmas because it was not inclusive. It is a reality that some folks dismiss. They want Christ erased at e...
Read more