John Loftus is out of arguments, he's taken to using the argumentum ad youtubeum.
Here's my response:
I've argued for the Outsider Test for Atheism (OTA) but most atheists like John Loftus just don't get it. For people like him I've made a playlist of four short videos so he can see what he refuses to see because he's blinded by his anti-faith.
Watch these videos below. Describe what you see. What is the difference between what you see? Describe these people. Do they look passionate in their beliefs? Are they sure of what they believe? Are they sincere believers? Do their blasphemes work? Why do they believe differently than 99% of the world? Why is it that if you got them together to discuss irreligion they would NOT change their minds?
My contention is that most all of these believers already think they have evaluated their own anti-faith objectively and fairly. So what to do? Tell them to examine their own anti-faith from the perspective of an outsider with the same level of skepticism used to evaluate the religious faiths they reject. This expresses the OTA. And if they refuse? Have them justify their double standard. All of the logical gerrymandering unbelievers are using to redistrict themselves out of taking this test reveals something significant: they know that they cannot objectively justify their own anti-faith.
(Note, if I sound like a raving madman, that's because I just copied and pasted what Loftus wrote, switching up a few words here and there.)
(WARNING: some of these videos use vulgar language):
Notice that in these videos we see atheists using dramatic elements to express their views (something believers supposedly due, per TCD), we see young, brainwashed atheist children (something unique to religious belief, per TCD), we see atheists "certain" of their faith (something that is supposed to characterize religious belief, per TCD), and we see shady debate tactics and faith-protection maneuvers (something also indexed solely to religious belief in TCD).
I also tried to post the youtube clip of my phone call with John Loftus on Gene Cook's radio show, but is has mysteriously been removed for "violation of terms of use." In those clips, John Loftus admitted he could not answer my arguments and questions but he kept the faith. Rather than dropping his faith and searching anew for the truth, he kept with it. He assumed that I just had to be wrong and went looking for the answers that just had to be there.
Notice that the first three videos are assertions without any accompanying cogent argumentation.
ReplyDelete"Fat Atheist" claims that the Bible tells us that God would never let any bad things happen. Huh?
The boy claims to know the meaning of "blasphemy against the Holy Spirit." Uh...nuh uh.
And "Silke?" Well, just imagine having that little clip replaying over and over again in your head for all eternity as you desperately try to read the captions as if they were flash cards.
And Dan Barker may be a smart guy, and he may be a wonderful jazz pianist. But Christians sure haven't cornered the market on snarkyness now, have they? "Let's not talk about my book because I may have changed my mind. But please make sure you buy it anyway."
The cogent faith of the unbeliever idiotically articulated.
Heh.
Re: Dan Barker's behavior during the debate with James White
ReplyDeleteWow. I've never heard a debate where someone objects to something the other person said in the middle of the opening presentation. And his point was stupid, too.
James White behaved himself pretty well during that; I imagine I would have gotten heated up and tried to take a jab or two at Barker in the meantime.
I always point out that atheists are simply shallow. In these clips we also see atheists are wildly ignorant.
ReplyDeleteAnd, yes, Silke need to figure out out to time those text inserts a little better. Come on, Silke, you're a 'Bright' afterall.
Silke, you do your homework, and I'll proofread for typos...
ReplyDeleteThe atheist in the fourth video, Dan Barker, wrote the foreword for The Christian Delusion.
ReplyDeletePlease state atheist doctrine that appeals to supernatural faith. Atheism is a negative response to a positive faith assertion. One should not expect homogenity within atheism because it isn't an epystemology.
ReplyDeleteAtheism for some is a negative response, others hold to positive atheism. That's 'cause there is no such thing as atheism, only atheisms. It's a culture. Many of the women have hairy armpits, and the men eat tofu and drive Priuses. Atheists even have their own ghetto language: "There's no &%*$ God you stupid *&^%$ Christians. Join us and take the @#!$& blasphemy challenge." There's even atheist music (a la Dan Barker's songs, e.g., Friendly Neighborhood Atheist) to tap into our emotional side and hornswaggle us into accepting atheism. They use scare tactics too, like, "What if you're wrong, or unscientific, or considered foolish at college?"
ReplyDeleteIf you would take the OTA then you would not pass it. The OTA leads to theism. You could theoretically pass the OTA, but not actually. I tested atheism as an insider.
Paul Manata wrote in the post:
ReplyDeleteI also tried to post the youtube clip of my phone call with John Loftus on Gene Cook's radio show, but is has mysteriously been removed for "violation of terms of use."
Here is the mp3 of Paul Manata calling in to the Narrow Mind with Gene Cook and John Loftus on the line. Listen to Loftus get dismantled in real-time, and listen to him whine at the end.
Loftus is most definitely not a deep thinker. The bottom line is that he's an extremely emotional reactionary.
Why is believing an eternally existent God absurd, John?
ReplyDelete"It's just borderline absurd."
Why is it absurd, John?
"It's just borderline absurd."
Why is it absurd, John?
...
Sheesh.
Wow... That audio is telling.
ReplyDeleteIt isn't like Loftus was caught unawares. It sounded as he was on that program at the same time as Manata and he knew about it ahead of time. How then did he come so woefully unprepared? He sounded as though he was somehow mentally crippled and I mean that as a descriptive term and not a deliberate insult.
John Loftus really needs some intercessory prayer because he is very clearly adrift in deep waters.
Paul Manata: "Atheists even have their own ghetto language: "There's no &%*$ God you stupid *&^%$ Christians. Join us and take the @#!$& blasphemy challenge."
ReplyDeleteJust showing their true colors and who they really are.
You mean gutter language, don't you?
ReplyDelete