analogyAre atheists smarter than believers… or are they reprobates… totally closed off from the grace required to believe and have faith?
Seems like there are smart and not-so-smart atheists and believers. So it can’t be intelligence.
To me atheism arguments are like 4 people arguing about a photograph of Exhibit A and its properties. Can’t know for sure whether Exhibit A exists merely from looking at photographs. Could be a staged picture, or computer enhanced imagery.
The debate continues, but then Person Y actually sees Exhibit A. The debate ends for him. He no longer needs to rely on intellect, analysis, or power of observation to determine whether Exhibit A exists. He has seen and experienced Exhibit A.
He might still find the debate interesting, but not compelling.
And if the only way Exhibit A can been seen, is the Exhibit itself reveals itself, it makes it more interesting. Exhibit A can’t be found. It can only be experienced if revealed.
I spent many years as an atheist and loved the debates, but the have lost a little steam, after having encountered Exhibit A.
Are you saying that you have a photograph of a god? Because if so, I’d really like to see it.
Otherwise, your analogy is broken. The right one is that arguments about the existence of a god are like four people arguing around an empty table with three of them each insisting that there’s a different photograph of a different god on the table.
I have seen no evidence to suggest that atheists are more intelligent or less intelligent than theists.
The first reason is: there is no reliable measurement for ‘intelligence’. The word isn’t even well defined. One person may be more intelligent at mathematical and logical thought processes while another may be more intelligent at interpersonal relationships.
‘IQ’ tests are not really a valid method of measuring intelligence because they vary a lot and don’t always address all areas of intelligence.
However, it is probable that, on average, atheists are better at logical reasoning than theists because there is no logical foundation for the belief in deities. However, this does assume that people apply their logical thought to their beliefs which is probably not always the case.
I had to look up the word ‘reprobate’ and got the following definitions:
As for the ‘grace required to believe and have faith’; most atheists have beliefs and a lot of them have strong beliefs. They have beliefs in politics, philosophy and ethics. Most atheists don’t have faith. Faith simply means ‘belief that is not based on evidence’. Atheists, scientists, skeptics, etc. reject hypotheses that are not backed up by evidence.
Your (poor) analogy seems to be referring to ‘personal experience’. The problem with personal experience is that you can’t demonstrate it to others so they have no reason to believe in your claim. They will likely accept it if your claim is small, eg. ‘I had pasta for dinner’, however extraordinary claims such as ‘a magical being created the world and spoke to me’ require extraordinary evidence, which can not be provided by personal experience. If you see something extraordinary that no one else saw, you should doubt it yourself, as there is the possibility of hallucination.
You have NOT seen ‘A’ - You, at best - at the absolute best, have had a biochemical based brain experience and have chosen to label that as evidence of A. Actual evidence only exists when it can be independent of your brain biochemistry. Your experience of A is NOT independent of your brain or many, many people would have heard of it by now. It is far more likely that you have simply chosen self-delusion over rational thought and have decided to stop thinking like an adult.
You are a troll trying to bait rational adults. I have a six year old that does this.
Edited to add - Oh, and grace? no such thing. It’s an invented notion designed to demonize those that don’t meet your criteria.
Very bad analogy but I will answer it since you ask,
I think it goes more like this “but then Person Y actually sees Exhibit A, but then he spots a reference at the bottom of the picture, this leads Y to a library where the reference leads him to a book which proves with sound argument that Exhibit A is in fact a true interpretation of what it claims to be. In the book is a web address which leads him to…… “
In short, as an Atheist I am always open to the next idea as long as it is factual and backed by proof.
Why would some people be “cut off” from the grace necessary to see what is there to see? Is that the act of a god who loves his/her/its/their creation? If you claim that a god created me, then he/she/it/they created me with a rational mind which is useful in every other area of life - except when it comes to said god. It really shouldn’t be difficult - Matthew 7:7 says, “Seek, and ye shall find: knock, and it shall be opened to you.”
Whatever is or isn’t on the table is irrelevant. Question is whether atheists are reprobates cut off from the grace necessary to see what there is to see.
All content is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.