Atheists will often tell you they won’t believe in something unless they can see it, but that’s a lie. The true nature of the atheist’s creed can be summed up by what is known as the, Bandwagon Effect and has nothing to do with whether or not something can be observed. The Bandwagon Effect essentially says that the more an idea is accepted and found to be commonplace, the more reliable and acceptable it becomes.
In other words, if the majority says its true, it should be believed and embraced.
Now, many will claim the opposite. It’s the Christian who follows societal norms and the atheist who is the independent lone voice for reason and logic.
While that may seem true on the surface, here’s why, in all actuality, it’s bogus:
Lets take, for instance, the Atheistic equivalent of the Christian’s Jesus—-Evolution.
Folks who buy into this idea are often portrayed as critical thinking, no nonsense, just-the-facts type individuals. Yet, upon inquiring from them how they know what they do, things begin to get a bit . . . Interesting.
What Is Proof, Anyway?
After hearing a, “scientific” claim, the average atheist will never go out and actually put forth the effort to determine if the findings are true.
Hashtag: Going on YouTube or watching National Geographic is not investigating the claim. If you wanted to do a real, scientific investigation, you would need to get a hands on, first person observation.
. . . Not exactly sure why I started that paragraph by saying, Hashtag. Honestly, I still don’t really know what any of that stuff means.
Anyways, someone will come back and ask, “How am I supposed to do a first person observation? Most people do not have direct access to the evidence.”
Alright, so how do you determine the findings are reliable if you can’t test them, yourself?
“We look for a consensus among the top research facilities and their published findings.”
Okay . . . Let me translate:
If enough people tell us it’s true, we don’t feel a need to test it. We just believe.
No firsthand, observable research.
No life long travels around the globe to excavation sites.
No handling of, “transitional” fossils.
No years spent in a lab comparing actual DNA samples.
They come off like they’re some type of intellectual giant with this vast body of hard evidence that they have tirelessly and painstakingly accumulated through years of testing and research. But the truth is, the majority of atheists are sitting in front of their computers clicking a mouse or reading a book, buying into whatever they’re told. They’re quite good at dressing it up, but when boiled down to it’s most basic form, they have simply chosen to believe.
That is not science. Nor is it a rational way to arrive at the truth. That, my friends, is the Bandwagon Effect.
Are Christians Guilty of This?
“Christians are the same way, and even worse!”
Have you ever noticed how Christians often refer to themselves as Witnesses?
Now there’s an interesting term.
Hmmm . . .
Why would Christians call themselves, witnesses?
What is it they’ve witnessed?
An encounter with Jesus Christ. And a changed life to prove it.
They are not relying on what others have told them. They’ve had the experience themselves so it isn’t second hand information.
Now, some may argue that isn’t true. They may claim it’s some type of delusion or wishful thinking . . . But they can’t PROVE it’s not true, a delusion or wishful thinking. All the atheist can do is stand on the outside looking in, and—–guess.
So here is the real clincher of the whole thing: Christians have an experience where the atheist only has an argument.
And the man with an argument is always at the mercy of the man with an experience.
In addition, unlike so many atheists who measure truth based on the number of people telling them that something is true, Christians can also collaborate their story with millions of others—–but don’t need to. The crux of their worldview does not depend on the Bandwagon because their knowledge is first person. It’s experiential—-the highest type of knowledge that exists.
And that, my friends, hits a whole lot closer to the scientific process than watching the Discovery Channel or having a subscription to Popular Science.