Convincing Atheist

dattaswami · Tadpole Joined: 22 Apr 2007 Posts: 18

Convincing Atheist

The logic of atheists is based on perception (Pratyaksha Pramana), which was propagated by the sage Charvaka. Perception means the knowledge derived from the observation with the naked eyes. In fact in the logic (Tarka Sastra) all the means of knowledge are based on perception only. In the inference (Anumana) also, the fire on the hill is inferred by its smoke. But the relationship between the fire and smoke is perceived with the naked eyes only. Similarly other means of knowledge are also based on the perception only. Thus Charvaka forms the basic of the entire logic and without logic there is no knowledge. The statement that the God is above logic must be proved only by perception. The divine miracles performed by the human form of Lord prove that there is a power above the logic. These miracles are seen by the naked eyes. The atheists must be allowed to prove whether the miracles are simply magic tricks. When they cannot prove, they must accept the existence of super power above the logic.

If they do not accept this they are contradicting their own basis, which is the perception. The divine miracles are experienced by the devotees and the experience cannot be contradicted. If the experience is contradicted, the experience of the atheists is also contradicted. Therefore atheists must be open-minded and should not be conservative. If they are conservative they have no right to criticize the religious conservatism.

The theory of Vedas and Bhagavath Gita never contradicts the perception and therefore the logic of atheists becomes the basis of the spiritual knowledge. The Lord comes in human form and this human form is perceived by the naked eyes. Even the miracles performed by demons establish the existence of super power. Therefore to convince the atheists the miracles of the Lord are not necessary. When they are convinced about the existence of the Super power (Maya), the possessor of the Super Power, the Lord, coming in human form must be also accepted because the form is seen by the naked eyes. The salvation is breakage of the bonds in this world. Since the bonds of this world exist based on the perception, the salvation is also existing based on the perception.

Since the family members and the money are perceived by the eyes, the bonds with them are also perceived. Thus the salvation (Moksha) must be accepted by the atheists. A single bond with the human form of the Lord is called ?Saayujya? or ?Kaivalya?. Since the human form is perceived, Sayujya or Kaivalya is also perceived and must be accepted by the atheists. The Bliss is derived by the devotee from the divine knowledge of the human form of the Lord. Therefore the Bliss is also true according to atheists. Thus the goal, the means to please the Lord (Sadhana) and the fruit of Sadhana (Moksha and Kaivalya) are perceived and exist in this world itself.

Veda says ?Yat Saakshat Aparokshaat?, ?Pratyagatmana Maikshat? which mean that the Lord in human form is perceived by the naked eyes. Veda also says ?Ihachet Avedeet?, which means that everything is true as seen in this world itself. This is called ?Jeevanmukthi?, which means attaining the salvation while one is alive and not after death. The salvation after the death is not true because that has no basis of perception. Thus if the atheists are little bit patient and leave their aggressive nature of criticism, they are best fitted in the true spiritual knowledge of Vedas. In fact Swami Vidyaranya included the philosophy of Charvaka in his book as one of the logical philosophies (Darsanaas).

FFT · Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 7:30 pm Post subject:

P1234567890 · Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2007 6:35 am Post subject: Re: Convincing Atheist

Nobby · Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2007 9:46 am Post subject: Who Says!

"P" I'm a walkin' miracle!! I'm not suppose to be here. Want me to send you a picture?? Laughing

P1234567890 · Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2007 9:47 am Post subject: Re: Who Says!

rjustice7 · Posted: Fri Jun 29, 2007 6:09 am Post subject: Just a thought...

You know, maybe I’m way off in left field, but I think we’re missing it guys. First of all, if you want to win an Atheist to the Lord, you don’t argue with them, or their logic. The first thing you do is become their friend. You have to learn to love that person, and love their soul. If you just want a crack at shooting their logic down, then you’re not looking to convince anyone. The next step is prayer and fasting. God can do things we cannot do, why rely upon our own intellect? Prayer and fasting is an important component in being successful in the work of our Lord. Then God will guide you and you will know the correct time to witness to that person. It’s all about love, having a burden for souls, and a passion for Christ. Of course questions of logic may come up, and when it does, speak to that person in a way that makes them think, but at the same time does not make them the enemy, or opponent of you and what you believe. One of the major questions that does come up is: How could God always be there? I think that question a lot of times determines whether some become or stay Atheist or not. Then I believe it is important to point out the only other opposing view to creation…evolution. Bring out the Big-Bang Theory. That stuff sounds ridiculous! Honestly though, no matter what you believe you have to accept the fact that something was always there. Well, that’s all for me guys, I’m definitely more in favor of being a friend first though, and your life will be the example. Let God take care of the rest…

Proverbs 3:5-7 Trust in the Lord with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding. In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths. Be not wise in thine own eyes: fear the Lord, and depart from evil.

atoz · Posted: Fri Jun 29, 2007 5:23 pm Post subject: Re: Just a thought...

Hi rjustice7,

Very well said! Love is the greatest proof of God, not creation! So we can only prove God's existence by loving ourselves as atheists so we can love atheists as ourselves.

To hate atheists is for me to deny the existence of God by disobeying the very God whose own existence is based on Love for atheists or our enemies or our opposites.

NB: Atheists already love who they know does NOT exist: mickey mouse, hamlet, harry potter, superman, alice, etc.smile

in Love as theists and atheists,
atoz

FFT · Posted: Sat Jun 30, 2007 5:45 pm Post subject: Re: Just a thought...

rjustice7 · Posted: Fri Jul 06, 2007 10:38 am Post subject: Say what?

Sounds like Christianity to me, unless you're referring to Christianity as a cult. I am a Christian FFT, I don't preach at people, I am their friend. I like to have friends, and I have many of them. When someone wants to know something of Christianity or the word, they know they can ask me, and it is easier as I have become their friend. I don't believe in attacking people and arguing with their logic as a convincing factor to someone. They will automatically shut out anything but their own opinion as will you because it becomes an argument. How would you feel if someone approached you because you were Athiest and started yelling at you, and condemning for being one? I'd say you wouldn't appreciate it. So really FFT, it is a matter of common sense. If you want to win people over, you don't begin by arguing with them, you become their friend. It's how anything works. Cults...probably so, salesman...definitely, people who deal with abused children...definitely. It's how you do things the right way. I think what bothers you about my post is that it is centered around love and having a kind heart, rather than arguing and logic. That's probably why you take one piece of my post and apply it to cult-ish behavior...you can deal with that. However you completely ignore the rest of the post. It is important to read on afterwards... Very Happy

FFT · Posted: Fri Jul 06, 2007 11:20 am Post subject:

It's not the approach Christianity has used in the past, it's more the modern "I'm Sorry, Ask Me Why" dishonest approach.

How would you feel if an atheist befriended you and then used that friendship as leverage to convince you to become an atheist? Because that's basically what you're describing—and it's not an honest approach. Christianity's not the only group guilty of it, it's rampant in cults (and fraternities Laughing

) as well. It's preying on other people's weaknesses for the sake of your own self-righteousness.

On the other hand, if there was actually a valid argument for Christianity you'd see fewer non-Christians.

P1234567890 · Posted: Fri Jul 06, 2007 1:57 pm Post subject: Re: Say what?

rjustice7 · Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 11:09 am Post subject: I can see your point...

I see your point P1234567890,

I suppose for some a good logical argument is best. Mainly my point was to try and show FFT, that being a friend is not exclusive to cults. Alot of people believe it is better to be a friend first. I don't know your personal beliefs, but I believe biblically, and the Bible teaches that we are to love people, and not deal with them in an angry, or aggressive manner. For most people argument makes them uncomfortable or angry. This is not a good way to win someone over to God. I do however understand that maybe for some people a good logical argument is best, but most aren't mature enough to see past the fact that they don't like the person that has made a good point. That is why I don't believe it is the best way for everyone.

To FFT,

That is why I explained to you, that if someone has questions on the matter, they will feel more comfortable speaking to me, as I have befriended them. I do not make friends with the intentions of converting them to Christianity. I just befriend as many people as possible. I can easily get along with most people, and I am a people person. So I like meeting new people anyways. Not only does this appeal to the type of person I am, but in the event there are those who want to know about God, then I am available. It is not leverage that I am using, since that's what you assume. This is my way of doing things, if you do not approve of it, I don't particularly care. You do things how you want to, and I'll do things the way I feel is right. I do not avoid logic, or make logic the enemy. I'm not talking about topic of discussion, I'm talking about how you speak with someone. I don't think you should cut anyone down, or argue harshly with them. That is what I meant when I said it! And what you said about how we can believe that God is eternal, and not believe the universe is eternal doesn't really apply to what I said. I was proving the point that something had to always be there. I believe it was God. I used this because I get that question alot about, "How could God always be there?" Anyways...lovely talking to you...