The Atheist Delusion Movie (2016)

[Thordis]

Having to prove the existence of God to an atheist is like having to prove the existence of the sun, at noon on a clear day. Yet millions are embracing the foolishness of atheism. “The Atheist Delusion” pulls back the curtain and reveals what is going on in the mind of those who deny the obvious. It introduces you to a number of atheists who you will follow as they go where the evidence leads, find a roadblock, and enter into a place of honesty that is rarely seen on film.

From Living Waters, creators of the award-winning TV program “The Way of the Master” and the hit movies “180” and “Evolution vs. God,” comes the powerful film “The Atheist Delusion.” Executive produced by TV co-host and best-selling author Ray Comfort (Hell’s Best Kept Secret, Scientific Facts in the Bible).

Learn more at http://www.AtheistMovie.com

[Loki]

An excellent video to watch, I can recommend it.

I used to be a card-carrying atheist. But in my search for more and more knowledge, I have explored everything... and eventually managed to dispel every single doubt in my mind about God. I am now a full born-again believer, and I have 100% certainty that God is real, and that Jesus is the only way to God. It's been quite a journey for me, but I got there in the end. Thank God!

[Luca]

Having to prove the existence of God to an atheist is like having to prove the existence of the sun, at noon on a clear day.

First we will need to define what "proving existence" actually means.
We could say something exists if you can sense it. But everyone senses different things and not all things that exist can be sensed.
I think the easiest (but maybe not complete) defition of existence would be to say somehting exists, if it can act on something existent or it is nothing, or it is a set of things that exists.
This definition already proides us with the natural numbers through some mental gymnastics. And we can be more explicit by stating that X is "acting on" Y (with both X,Y existent) means that X:Y->Z for Z something existent. Therefor X is a function/mapping from X to Z.

Example: nothing exists (denoted by {}) and the set of all nothing exists (denoted {{}}), just like the set of all nothing and nothing (denoted {{{}},{}}). the natural numbers exist through renaming. addition/multiplication exists by definiton of mappings existing. From this we can define a vectorspace over the real numbers by constructing a mapping from the natural numbers through the integers and rationals all the way to the reals. This allows us to create an atlas with charts and morphisms and then we can even create a mapping this this 3-manifold to the real numbers. Lets call this mapping "DOG" and every every point on the manifold is mapped to data in the reals which corresponds to how a dog would have his data placed in the real world. Therefor we have proven theoretically the existence of dogs. We can then continue all of this and define mappings from one manifold to the next called "BARK" etc.
The correlation to the real world is still kinda fuzzy. This is because we lack the fundamental data which created this universe. (like what data started where). After we know this, everything is just some cellular automata.

After all this exposition it is now also conceivable why we (each person being some anchor tied to existence, because by thinking he proves his existance himself) can prove that the sun exists but god not neccecarily.

[Loki]

First we will need to define what "proving existence" actually means.
We could say something exists if you can sense it. But everyone senses different things and not all things that exist can be sensed.
I think the easiest (but maybe not complete) defition of existence would be to say somehting exists, if it can act on something existent or it is nothing, or it is a set of things that exists.
This definition already proides us with the natural numbers through some mental gymnastics. And we can be more explicit by stating that X is "acting on" Y (with both X,Y existent) means that X:Y->Z for Z something existent. Therefor X is a function/mapping from X to Z.

Example: nothing exists (denoted by {}) and the set of all nothing exists (denoted {{}}), just like the set of all nothing and nothing (denoted {{{}},{}}). the natural numbers exist through renaming. addition/multiplication exists by definiton of mappings existing. From this we can define a vectorspace over the real numbers by constructing a mapping from the natural numbers through the integers and rationals all the way to the reals. This allows us to create an atlas with charts and morphisms and then we can even create a mapping this this 3-manifold to the real numbers. Lets call this mapping "DOG" and every every point on the manifold is mapped to data in the reals which corresponds to how a dog would have his data placed in the real world. Therefor we have proven theoretically the existence of dogs. We can then continue all of this and define mappings from one manifold to the next called "BARK" etc.
The correlation to the real world is still kinda fuzzy. This is because we lack the fundamental data which created this universe. (like what data started where). After we know this, everything is just some cellular automata.

After all this exposition it is now also conceivable why we (each person being some anchor tied to existence, because by thinking he proves his existance himself) can prove that the sun exists but god not neccecarily.

Your reasoning is faulty.

[Badr madani]

There nothing called 'becoming atheist or believer ' its either be born with it or you are none ( you think somehow else )

I was born and raised and still i am an atheist. Me trying to believe in god made me mentally ill.

[Sacrificed Ram]

If it was good, was in Netflix.