The irrational "rationality" argument

[Starman]

The atheist claim of "rationality" is utterly irrational.

Overwhelmingly, atheists claim to have been believers, who turned to atheism on the basis of rational thinking... while they were believers.

So can atheists be believed when they assert their own rationality, and deny that of Christians, whom they insist are not rational, when their own "rational" decisions were made while they were "irrational"?

Is this not one of the many conundrums of atheism?

Finally, is it "rational" to claim that one singular belief (in atheism) instantly confers rationality, reason and intellect, as atheists insist? Are intellectualism and rationality achieved so effortlessly?

[Jashwell]

[Replying to post 1 by Starman]

I believe those that did convert are claiming that their previous position was irrational (and their beliefs not rationally founded), and that the application of rational thinking led them to change their position.

Though I've never been a theist myself.

[Zzyzx]

.

Finally, is it "rational" to claim that one singular belief (in atheism) instantly confers rationality, reason and intellect, as atheists insist? Are intellectualism and rationality achieved so effortlessly?

1. Is it irrational to say "I do not believe tales told about Zeus (or Quetzalcoatl or any of the thousands of proposed 'gods')"?

2. Is it irrational to say, "I do not believe tales told about ANY of the 'gods' including the bible God"?

Rational Theists and Atheists generally agree regarding #1 but part company at #2 when Theists insist that their favorite "god" is true and the others are false. In other words an Atheist can legitimately say, "We both disbelieve in gods but you exclude one."

The "evidence" presented favoring any of the gods is "Take my (or his) word for it" and "believe my (the) stories." Christians seem to think that their tales by ancient writers are something more than the word of people who cannot be identified with certainty. However, the revered "scriptures" (stories) ARE the word of people who can't even be shown to have witnessed the events and conversations they describe decades or generations later.

It seems to irritate, befuddle, or anger believers when others do not believe as they do " as though believers had some special (supernatural?) source of information that others do not. What they actually have is belief " which is not the same as knowledge. One can believe that the Earth is central to the solar system " but that is not knowledge.

[Divine Insight]

The atheist claim of "rationality" is utterly irrational.

Overwhelmingly, atheists claim to have been believers, who turned to atheism on the basis of rational thinking... while they were believers.

So can atheists be believed when they assert their own rationality, and deny that of Christians, whom they insist are not rational, when their own "rational" decisions were made while they were "irrational"?

Is this not one of the many conundrums of atheism?

No, it's not a conundrum at all really. Most atheists who were "believers" didn't really believe in the Bible. In fact, it's been shown that most devout Christians don't even know what's in the Bible.

Instead these people were indoctrinated into the religion by their parents and other adults who lied to them. What these atheists had actually done was place their faith in their parents and pastors, only to discover later that they had been lied to.

I believed in Jesus in the same way that I had believed in Santa Claus earlier. Simply because I was told that he exists, etc. However, when I actually decided to become a preacher and looked into the Bible for myself I realized that the whole thing is just a cultural scam. And I came to the realization that I had been scammed. Of course the people who scammed me had also been scammed. They just never realize that they had been scammed.

In any case, Starman, it's pretty clear that you are fighting an imaginary battle of "Christians versus Atheists". But that's actually not even a real war. That is a totally make believe war.

Atheists have simply recognized that they had been duped by a false religion. They aren't at "war" with Christians. They are just trying to help the Christians see the light and recognize that Christianity has been a scam all along.

[Divine Insight]

[Replying to post 1 by Starman]

I believe those that did convert are claiming that their previous position was irrational (and their beliefs not rationally founded), and that the application of rational thinking led them to change their position.

Though I've never been a theist myself.

The overwhelming vast majority of "Christians" are not theists really. They are simply good little obedient children doing what their parents taught them is the right thing to do.

They were indoctrinated into the religion from childhood. In fact, studies have revealed that atheists actually know more about the Bible than Christians do. This is because Christians don't really need to know what's in the bible. All they need to do is "confess" that Jesus is Lord. No understanding is required. As long as they support a belief in Jesus they are good to go.

It's really not unlike little children with Santa Claus. Do little children actually do the investigation into Santa Claus to see whether the stories makes any sense? No, not at all. They just believe in Santa Claus because their parents told them that Santa exists.

Christianity is precisely the very same type of thing. No theism required. Just believe what your parents tell you and accept Jesus as your savior. How it all works is unimportant. In fact, the less you question it the better off you are.

[Hamsaka]

[Replying to post 1 by Starman]

Overwhelmingly, atheists claim to have been believers, who turned to atheism on the basis of rational thinking... while they were believers.

One cannot become a nonbeliever while still believing.

One realizes they are a nonbeliever when one admits they do not believe.

[instantc]

The atheist claim of "rationality" is utterly irrational.

Overwhelmingly, atheists claim to have been believers, who turned to atheism on the basis of rational thinking... while they were believers.

So can atheists be believed when they assert their own rationality, and deny that of Christians, whom they insist are not rational, when their own "rational" decisions were made while they were "irrational"?

Is this not one of the many conundrums of atheism?

Finally, is it "rational" to claim that one singular belief (in atheism) instantly confers rationality, reason and intellect, as atheists insist? Are intellectualism and rationality achieved so effortlessly?

We are not simply rational or irrational. Everyone is capable of thinking rationally and irrationally. Switching from one to the other is self-improvement.

[Box Whatbox]

[Replying to post 1 by Starman]

I don't think anyone can safely claim to be rational, if they have reached that conclusion purely through their own reasoning.
No system of logic can establish the validity of its own axioms, or the reliability of its own process of analysis.
(See Godel's Incompleteness Theorem, Turing's Halting Problem, and other related arguments.)

[Starman]

No, it's not a conundrum at all really. Most atheists who were "believers" didn't really believe in the Bible. In fact, it's been shown that most devout Christians don't even know what's in the Bible.

Please provide evidence of your claims.
That atheists weren't really believers means that they were not in fact Christians.
Therefore no conversion took place.

Atheists don't debate. They use verbal gymnastics, and very unconvincingly.
There is no Scriptural requirement that Christians "know what's in the Bible."
You would only make such a claim as a strawman argument, as atheists so often make, invoking imaginary things and comparing them to historically documented people, demanding proof and evidence while providing almost nothing by way of proof or evidence for their own claims.

[Box Whatbox]

Atheists don't debate. They use verbal gymnastics, and very unconvincingly.
There is no Scriptural requirement that Christians "know what's in the Bible."
You would only make such a claim as a strawman argument, as atheists so often make, invoking imaginary things and comparing them to historically documented people, demanding proof and evidence while providing almost nothing by way of proof or evidence for their own claims.

Are you under the impression that generalisations about large groups of people (atheists, theists, scientists, , etc) have sufficient specificity to form worthwhile debating points?