Atheists, what are the most convincing theist arguments you heard of?

[Angrboda]

Huggy, you're just derailing the thread with a vendetta. Nobody gives a shit about your past grievances, and that doesn't prove some high and mighty truth about atheists in general.

[Neo-Scholastic]

---

The Great Commission is to share the Good News of Jesus Christ - to  share to our own personal experience and point the many changed lives of others. Apologetics were never meant to convince non-believers to come to faith. That is the work of the Holy Spirit speaking through the sublime. Our God is a wounded God. His compassion was born of agony and injustice. He gives comfort and counsel to us in our times of need. The role of apologetics is just to demonstrate that the trust we put in the hope of our hearts is reasonable.

Many of you are not convinced. Similarly the skeptical objections are not persuasive. I see only various combinations of non-sequiturs and straw men. What remains, for me, is not some abstract 'argument from ignorance' but rather the abiding presence of an ineffable Other, the all-encompassing love that reaches out to me even though I deserve nothing. As John 4:19 says, we love Him because He loved us first. That is His invitation to all those who, like me and so many others, see beauty, knows compassion, and whose hearts cry out from the darkness.

---

But YOUR god is a strawman. How can skeptical observations be persuasive, when what you believe is an emotional belief, not based in logic or reality?

In a particularly resonate line from the movie Rango - "No man can walk away from his own story." Everyone starts from their own experience. I believe it is right and proper for people to approach reality with their whole being. There is a place for logical analysis. But not when listening to Bach, staring out over the Ocean, reflecting on personal existence alienated from the a larger world that is wholly Other, or finding inexplicable peace hidden in crushing defeat and anguish. That is the human condition. No doubt, these have an emotional component but they also represent kinds of unmediated knowing - approaching reality on its terms and not our own. After those fleeting moments of numinous insight, sober reflection does not ask if those experiences are real, for that is to deny one's own reality; but rather, what they mean and live fully by rationally incorporating them into one's life.

But of course, YMMV.

[Huggy Bear]

Huggy, you're just derailing the thread with a vendetta. Nobody gives a shit about your past grievances, and that doesn't prove some high and mighty truth about atheists in general.

Actually what I've stated fall directly in line with the title of this thread. It simply states theist argument, it does not specify that the argument had to be about religion.

[Angrboda]

After those fleeting moments of numinous insight, sober reflection does not ask if those experiences are real, for that is to deny one's own reality; but rather, what they mean and live fully by rationally incorporating them into one's life.

Bullshit. Applying appropriate levels of skepticism to personal experience is a sign that you accept your human experience for what it is, flawed and imperfect. Anything else is a denial of what we know about the human condition. To be swayed by the numinous to Godly conclusions is just ignoring our greater knowledge of how such experiences fool us. That's the real denial.

[Huggy Bear]

I know this is an embarrassing subject for you atheists but I'm not letting it go because it's something that's never been resolved. It's a common atheist tactic to quit responding to or ignore a thread when they have been proven to be wrong, I can provide at least 3 or more examples of this.

The only reason I can think of it is that the majority of you are anti-theist not atheist, which explains why atheists must take the opposite side of an argument against a theist. It doesn't matter if the subject has nothing to do with religion, or the atheist argument is patently false.

So please get outta here with that "we'll accept evidence" nonsense, because you clearly won't accept evidence from any theist as it is.

But let Minimalist stroll into a thread and fart in your guys general direction and provide not one source to back up his claims, and watch you guys scramble to see how much of his ass you can inhale.

We are embarrassed.  But it's for you.

You've never given evidence for your claims, or shown us where an "atheist argument" is patently false.

Who are you?

I provided evidence on many occasions, it's just that you're relatively new and weren't around to witness any of it.

What you should take notice of however is that no one that's been around long enough will challenge what I've stated earlier.

[Angrboda]

What you should take notice of however is that no one that's been around long enough will challenge what I've stated earlier.

Why? Because it's a childish expectation? Huggy, people don't like you. That may have to do with your unorthodox views or it may have to do with childish behavior such as you're displaying here. Regardless, that fact alone is enough to account for why nobody is engaging you. You don't need to search for arcane truths about atheists to explain that fact. And that you're claiming implicitly that your arcane explanation is the only one to account for your being ignored is easily seen to be false.

[Faith No More]

Yeah, Huggy, you might want to consider that the quality of conversation you get has more to do with you than any attribute of atheists.

---

Bullshit.  Applying appropriate levels of skepticism to personal experience is a sign that you accept your human experience for what it is, flawed and imperfect.  Anything else is a denial of what we know about the human condition.  To be swayed by the numinous to Godly conclusions is just ignoring our greater knowledge of how such experiences fool us.  That's the real denial.

Bingo. He's essentially saying that the intellect will tell us that some of our experiences and feelings do not coordinate with reality, and he doesn't want to do that. Chad likes his warm-fuzzies too much to be concerned with whether they're real or not.

[Huggy Bear]

What you should take notice of however is that no one that's been around long enough will challenge what I've stated earlier.

Why? Because it's a childish expectation? Huggy, people don't like you. That may have to do with your unorthodox views or it may have to do with childish behavior such as you're displaying here. Regardless, that fact alone is enough to account for why nobody is engaging you. You don't need to search for arcane truths about atheists to explain that fact. And that you're claiming implicitly that your arcane explanation is the only one to account for your being ignored is easily seen to be false.

Really? Keep telling yourself that, meanwhile y'all will come out of the woodwork to engage lil Rik...

[Mister Agenda]

I don't see the title of the thread as being restricted to religious subjects, there are many discussions (which have nothing to do with anything religion) where in spite of proof, atheists refuse to be convinced.

So miss me with the "If I see evidence that God exists, I'll accept it" nonsense.

If you can't accept things that are easily provable, such as Denmark not having a secular government.  To this day not one of the atheists involved in that discussion has come out and admitted they were wrong, so either they still aren't convinced, or they will never admit to being convinced...

Denmark, in fact, does not have a secular government. What now?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Denmark

[Faith No More]

Really? Keep telling yourself that, meanwhile y'all will come out of the woodwork to engage lil Rik...

I'd rather debate him than you. At least he doesn't move the goalposts with every fucking post.