Wednesday 8 January 2020

The Atheist/Skeptics Arguments Pertaining To Prayer


Atheo/evolutionists usually say prayer is just, "confirmation bias". Of course they refer to general prayer, because they always assume that one of their premises is true, which is pluralism. So basically ALL PRAYER from, "any religion" is equally valid to the atheist as they lump it all in as, "the same" or, "equivalent". But this is an atheist assumption they presume is correct to begin with.

 I remember this from an atheist celebration day, an atheist talked about God as a generalised God then explained that according to chance prayers just don't get answered. He used the analogy of God having an email spam box where there were too many requests to deal with.

The problem is logically speaking there is no such thing as the "God of atheists", which is a god that everyone would pray to, and that we would all know, no matter what religion we were from. This "god" the atheist invents, they then knock down like a strawman. But it is the begging the question fallacy yet again, to SIMPLY ASSUME God answers the prayers of any individual, including murderers, rapists, though God is simply some genie in a bottle. Just because the atheist assumes a secular version of God, an unbiblical version of God, doesn't mean that god exists nor does it mean that we as Christians are arguing such a god exists.

The strawman atheist god could not possibly exist, because all of the tenets of the major religions, clash and mutually exclude each other (law of non-contradiction). If you're atheist you may counter; "but God could just be reached through any means, there are many paths to God it could be the one God over all religions and each religion is just a type of conduit".

This PSEUDO-SPIRITUALITY where all religions are equally valid, is an invention of the secular world and natural philosophy and has become a sort of ignorant modern phenomenon, where liberals seem to think under some sort of universalism, every human on earth is connected to God as long as they indulge some "spiritual" prayer of some sort..

So if you pray to the god of canned tomatoes, this then means according to this Einsteinien atheist, that the prayer warrior should get the same result as the Christian.

B A N A N A S.

The reason why the majority of prayer goes unanswered the bible tells us, is because "there is no way to the Father except through me" - Jesus Christ. (praphrased as I don't remember the exact words).

So then, God only hears and answers the prayers of the redeemed because according to the bible, this is a sinful world and the majority are sinners living for themselves. Like Jesus said, "wide is the path to destruction and many there be that find it, but narrow is the path to salvation and few there be that find it." (paraphrase)

 In other words the atheist PAINTS God onto an atheist, evolutionary scenario. They believe that everyone thinks like them, that the world is just an accident, humanity just apes, and our spiritual lives are just some wishful thinking and all people equally have access to God in prayer.

H I L A R I O U S L Y ignorant.

CONCLUSION: If prayer is generally not answered, this would only disprove the atheist strawman god exists, the god they invent so they can knock him down. But since this argument is only a strawman fallacy anyway, and Christians that accept the bible are NOT arguing God would answer all prayer, then this is a WEAK and fallacious argument.

2. CONFIRMATION BIAS, POST HOC REASONING,(post hoc ergo propter hoc), etc..

Atheists are correct about some things. They are not always wrong. Sometimes some of them have studied enough to recognise there are mistakes believers are making including Christians. We do have biases such as memory bias, confirmation bias, wishful thinking, superstitious behaviours, observer bias, we are highly selective and highly subjective. I myself have experience in critical thinking and that experience has taught me just how difficult it is to achieve objectivity. It also has allowed me to see how biased atheists are, and how they only seem to apply mistakes to theists but never themselves.

So when it comes to issues such as post hoc reasoning or confirmation bias, while atheists know how to spot those errors and when they apply, or when a fallacy applies, the crucial issue is that they tend not to notice when the fallacy or error does not apply.

For example with prayer, for a persons personal prayer they would say, "they count the hits but not the misses". This might apply and I agree it applies, when it comes to a mundane type of general prayer but how can the value be determined as equivalent where the value changes tremendously from outcome to outcome? So then the atheist commits the error of only seeing the matter quantitatively where there is a qualitative difference.

To explain what I mean imagine I was so stupid as a believer that I committed the most absurd example of post hoc reasoning by standing at the beach before sunrise and praying for the sun to rise, then when it did declared my prayer was answered. This may count as a, "hit", or if I pray to not stub my toenail and I don't, this may be declared a, "hit", no matter how tenuous the example, HOWEVER how could being healed from cancer or healed from an impossible situation be counted in value as one "hit"?
Here is a testimony for example, of a major miracle:

Conclusion: You cannot say that a major miracle is one hit, then count against it 87 misses, and then say, "atheism wins, God doesn't answer prayer", because a hit as big as your life being saved which goes against all medical science, counts as perhaps 1 million hits in value. So then the error in the skeptics' reasoning is to treat the matter as purely quantitative.


 The second atheist error is a hidden premise or an implicit argument. The atheist doesn't come out and say it which is why it is implied and hidden, but what they are not revealing to us is that they are PRESUMING with their quantitative fallacy, that God is basically a vendor machine, (in other words they are again presuming atheism is true). They assume that the atheist strawman god is sort of like a genie in a bottle, where when you make requests, he has to score most hits beyond what chance would allow.

This is simply FARCICAL and a shallow concept of God we do not argue as theists. 

How could the Lord God, the Creator of all life and all laws of physics, be at the behest of a simple human being? Has the atheist temporarily forgotten the very thing he has been telling us, that we are full of bias, errors, we are subjective and fallible? Yet it seems when it comes to prayer study the atheists' assumption is that the human is perfect and most of their prayers should therefore be answered. 

But how on earth would a finite human brain which operates like a bag of rusty spanners being filled with biases and error as the atheists so passionately inform us, ever be able to know what is best for their personal situation compared to an all knowing God? 

This is why the book of Proverbs says, "the steps of a man are ordered by the Lord, how then can he understand his own way?" In other words, our understanding, our level of intellect and limited wisdom compared to the infinite, doesn't even register on the retard scale compared to the Lord. We are like dumb robotic sheep forever walking in circles, thinking we know what is best for us.

So this is a MONSTER of a false premise, the presumption that God would entertain most human whims, think of the catastrophe that could lead to because of conflicting desires alone!

Bob; "God give me Jane, I want her!"
Jane; "God give me Kevin!"
Kevin; "God give me Bob, I desire him."

The bible says that we can present God with any request but that, "if it is according to His will" (paraphrase), it will then be granted. It is not some absurdly common or banal affair such as, "God don't let it rain on me". That would be an atheists prayer to the strawman atheist god, not a real prayer. 

CONCLUSION: Naturally there is no way to differentiate between God's answer being, "no" and God not being there. The atheist simply chooses the option that God is not there because he doesn't exist to their mind, and so flippantly attributes the hits to confirmation bias by giving all answered prayers the same value no matter how different those requests are on the spectrum.

As a personal witness to the miraculous, I can definitely say that I can only remember the miraculous occurring where there was NEED rather than WANT.

The atheist does not consider God's will when it comes to prayer, nor His sovereignty because they have concluded God is not there before they study prayer, which is ultimately, atheist bias.

No comments:

Post a Comment