I posted the video below to prove a point that most Christians are already aware of about atheists, even if they are not able to articulate this blatantly obvious truth; atheists are completely irrational. I want to be clear about what I'm saying here. Atheists cannot under any circumstances truly be able to think rationally, because it is completely impossible for rationality to exist within the atheist world view.
Let's look at a few of the laws of logic as listed on Carm.org. It's worth pointing out that atheists believe these laws to be absolute, well, at least for now they do.
- Law of Identity. Which means something is what it is, and not what it is not.
- Law of Non-Contradiction. Which means something cannot be both true and false at the same time, in the same sense.
- Law of Excluded Middle. Which means a statement is either true or false, without middle ground.
Generally speaking these laws are accepted by everyone, and why wouldn't they be? Can a car be a car, and be a dog? No, that would be ridiculous. Can the statement, "My name is Tom Estes", be true, and not true at the same time? No. Can that same statement NOT be either true or false? Ofcourse not. These questions illustrate the above laws of logic, and no one questions them.......well, almost no one.
But before I get into that, let me ask you a question; how is rational discourse possible without these laws? How would we be able to talk about my car if the whole time I wanted to talk about my car, I had to prove it was a car, and not a dog? How could I say what my name is if there were always someone there to say, "Well, sure, that's what your name is to you, but to me it's different." Or, if after introducing myself someone would say, "I don't think it is either true or false that your name is Tom Estes." Do you see what I'm saying? Conversation would be impossible.
But see, this is the world in which atheists live. They don't believe in absolutes of any kind. Oh sure, they claim these laws of logic as absolutes up to a point, and what is that point? They will accept these laws of logic right up to where their thinking is proven wrong. Then the conversation becomes a mish-mash of crazy ideas which will claim that just because something is wrong to me, doesn't mean it's wrong to someone else. This is when further conversation becomes pointless.
This is greatly illustrated by a simple, two minute video that I posted before, which I'm going to post again, and share some of the comments with you.
Okay, pretty simple right? Well, let's look at some comments made by atheists:
This video inadvertently makes a point for science.
We can measure the wavelength of the reflected light from the balloon and label that color X. We can then compare it to wavelengths of light from other sources that the people in the video deem to be red, blue, green, etc. It is then possible to discern if they are all indeed seeing the same color and just have different labels for it (i.e. blue, green, yellow, etc.). This illustrates the power of evidence based investigation. Without this investigation, we have no way of knowing where the confusion lies.
Is there any real confusion here? Ofcourse not, the balloon is red, and it is an absolute fact that it is red. Let's look again at the logical absolutes that atheists generally subscribe to;
- Something cannot be itself and not itself. So, the balloon can't be red, and green at the same time.
- Something cannot be true and false at the same time. So, it cannot be both true and false that the balloon is red.
- A statement must be either true or false. So, it's either red, or it's not red.
Pretty simple if you apply logic, right? Well, not so much. Check out this next comment.
What we call red refers to electromagnetic waves vibrating at around 405-480 terrahertz. As primates we have trichromatic vision (I made a post about that week or so ago), but even if we only had dichromatic vision and could not perceive true colour we would still be able to use tools to measure exactly what frequency light the balloon was emitting. After all this is exactly what we do beyond the visible spectrum with infra-red and ultraviolet cameras. The balloon does not change the colour light that it emits, and even thought these people might disagree about the name of the colour they must agree about the frequency of light that it is emitting (unless they also differ on the definition of a second).
What this person is trying to say is they were disagreeing on what the color should be called. But again, any rational person knows that wasn't what the discussion was about.
And one more comment:
Truth is whatever is true. Okay. But..are they saying that they are the ones who really have it? This is where I get lost. If I didn't know who did the video I would assume it was a case for science. But since I do...I'm just confused. Sorry.
Yea, I can see where that video would be confusing, don't you? I mean, who does that hateful lady think she is saying that red is red? The nerve of some people!
Here's the HardTruth.
This is basically why I've stopped responding to pretty much all atheists on this blog. When someone lives in a world where nothing is true (except evolution, evolution is absolutely true, so true in fact that it would be absolutely untrue to even think anything else) you can't have a conversation with them. Conversation only works when people understand that things exist, and they are what they are. Now you might say, "Why are atheists like this?" Because any logic that includes absolutes must work it's way to God being real. Think about it, all humans are different, so none of us think exactly the same way. With that in mind, who are we to declare what any absolute truth is? We can't. But if we know that there are absolutes, then there by necessity must be One who is Absolute, God. I know what you're thinking, "That is really simple." Tell me about it, so why don't atheists get it? Simple answer; because they are lost, and in need of a Saviour, and that's the HardTruth.