Can an Atheist argue someone out of faith?

[Captain Scarlet]

---

I don't know if I subscribe to your definition of humanistic (I'm not a secular humanist nor a religious humanist), but I do believe that all of our actions should be justified internally with reason, ethics and justice. All that is encompassed by our developed human nature. I just factor in a few more checks and balances, such as intuition, the Holy Spirit, and a comprehensive scripture check. Just to clarify I don't deny any of my own human aspects and value every life at least as a fellow human.

You clearly stated that your personal experience was in some way was subjective personal proof of a god. My contention is only if you are prepared to accept that is also true for others who have a similar experience, but with less desirable results (the serial killer or suicide bomber being examples). So do you concede that they also experience god, or that your experience is the true god and they are mistaken? If you concede that you know where I'll go next of course, but if you don't you still have offered no grounds on which to deny their claims, as all your defences could be used by them as well. Scripture can't really help here as it will support both the humane and murderous amongst us.

---

subjective experience alone is not proof of my understanding of God. My only point was that you have to experience something first before you can decide whether it's real or not. They may or may not have had an experience prior to analysis, idk. The examples you used though obviously did not do enough (or any) other verification prior to acting on blind faith or delusion. If they had, perhaps they'd see it was their own desires or a delusion that had caused the experience.Scripture (the Holy Bible in my religion) when analyzed as a whole does not condone the murderous. While I concede that there are incidences of atrocities recorded as being in God's name, Jesus came to teach us the error of our previous interpretations and uses of the old testament, and when looked at humanistic-ally are of selfish motivation not an external to selfish desires.

I don't think you can state that they didn't do enough verification. They could turn round to you and claim exactly the same and they would not be short of biblical authority in doing so. If you allow for the possibility that you are right then you have to concede that they could also be either. My position is that you are both wrong.

If Jesus existed, and I'll concede that it is at probable, he was was alleged to say lots of things, as an orthodox Jew who accalimed the OT. He probably used is own humanistic qualities to tone down some of the shrill stuff.