Theists—let us face it, as far as atheist’s favorite target goes we are dealing 99.9% with Christians—spend quite a bit of time and energy responding to atheist’s various condemnations of everything from the Old Testament doings of the Israelites to whatever the latest Pat Robertson gaff may be.
Yet, a crucially critical question is: upon what premise do atheists base condemnation?
In essence, they premise their condemnations upon personal preferences. And upon what are their personal preferences premised? Further personal preferences.
These are, themselves, premised upon still more personal preferences.
A simple test bears this out. When an atheist condemns some action, ask them upon what premise they are condemning. They will offer an assertion. Ask them upon what the assertion is premised upon and they will offer a further assertion. Ask about that one and you will receive yet another and so on.
You will end up facing a tel of personal preferences / assertions, a bottomless pit of baseless condemnations.
Atheism discredits condemnation because it has no basis upon which to condemn anything.
Condemnation discredits atheism because it shows God’s moral law within them.
And you know how it goes: a moral law implies a moral law giver, morality is irrelevant to nature (only survival is) and so a moral law giver is what we call God.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A plea: I have to pay for server usage and have made all content on this website free and always will. I support my family on one income and do research, writing, videos, etc. as a hobby. If you can even spare $1.00 as a donation, please do so: it may not seem like much but if each person reading this would do so, even every now and then, it would add up and really, really help out. Here is my donate/paypal page.
Due to robo-spaming, I had to close the comment sections. However, you can comment on my Twitter
page, on my Facebook page, on my Google+ page and/or the “Share/Save” button below the tags.