God inspired prophets and a book

"You cannot look on the other side of that wall because you know that would be the same as questioning what is on your side of the wall and your brain cannot let that happen." I've read "The Extended Phenotype", God is not Great", "The selfish Gene", "The God Delusion", and "The Blind Watchmaker", and "The end of Faith". Why? I was an Atheist. Why did I change? Because I can see something that is blatantly obvious, a pattern. This pattern is what is on the other side of the Atheists' wall. You cannot look on the other side of that wall because you know that would be the same as questioning what is on your side of the wall and your brain cannot let that happen. Con himself told us he chose not to read my round 1 argument once he realized what it was. Atheists "want proof". They don't want proof... I was an Atheist at one time. That's why I am well too established in how to stand against it, and I stand against it because it will destroy you before the end. This is why militant atheists are affixed on religion. It's always on their minds, haunting them like a dirty secret. * My past threads consist of: "Atheism and Rumination Loops" http://www.debate.org... * "Atheism the Rage Against God" http://www.debate.org... Of which I posed the question: "Believers are entitled to speculate on why someone would not wish to be bound by an unalterable moral law. And they are justified in asking why this wish should be so profound that such persons actively desire that the universe should be a pointless and meaningless chaos, without design or purpose." * Atheism forsakes You in your Darkest Hour" http://www.debate.org... "Atheism is what Happens when you Give up" http://www.debate.org... Ask me how I know that? * "Many false prophets have arisen through many religions using the same "God told me to tell you" lines. They also wrote books that God "told" them to write. Confusion..." You say "confusing". Is it really? No, not really, but Atheists don't study anything beyond what atheist apologetics sites blindly spew out against Christianity. It takes a 10 minute study to see the difference, but that's 10 minutes to long for rabid Atheists foaming at the mouth to commit theological suicide. According to Islam itself, Muhammed's wet nurse accused him of demon posession as a child, he was "tricked by Satan" to write false suras, and he initially claimed his revelation(The Quran) came from the devil. That's a clue...Hinduism worships demon gods like Kaali ma. Buhhdism is nontheistic. Anyone else we need to cover concerning their "revelations"? * Con: "..you can choose to believe that my way is a better way." And it's not. It tests, proves, and refines no one to show their metal. It coddles, and creates mindless, unproven slaves who have "witnessed thine omnipotent power," thus serve out of fear rather than from a desire to know you freely. * Con: "What will you do with that truth?" Oppose those hellbent on destroying hope. You have held the mirror up, but are unable to turn it upon yourself. * Con: "If you were God, would you want the human race to not know who you are or to quickly get past that point and get to the worshipping and obedience and guidance parts?" If individuals in their true, tested, proven form aimed to snuff out hope, meaning, and purpose, perhaps not. What are they good for? Obviously, killing hope, meaning, and purpose, thus in temporary fashion, they would accomplish their purpose. Seeing theywanted me absent from their life, I wouldn't force my way in. Maybe I'd test my own self to empathize with humanity. Maybe I'd want something that cannot be faked in an imperfect, challenging world. Something like this: John 15:15 "I no longer call you servants, because a servant does not know his master's business. Instead, I have called you friends." * Con: "That is what you have no choice but to believe." Not so much. I chose Con's way for the better part of a decade. The real reason Atheists take this hard stance is they don't actually know what they are talking about. I've seen argument after argument, and saw a blatant disregard for "proof" or the actual theologies of religion. They point out what the seriously believe is the truth about religion. I usually get a good laugh. The best way to tell an Atheist fits this category is when they make the ignorant implication that religions are all pretty much alike. The only way to think that is to know nothing about religion. The reason Christopher Hitchens was so affixed with religion and debate was he was actually educated on different religions. This haunted him thusly. * Con: "how else could you admit to yourself that my way is better than the way of the current God you believe in?"It isn't better. If Con as God wanted true, proven love, his way would fail, prove nothing, and crash into the ocean of b.s. manmade concepts formulated by imperfect human minds limited to nonomniscient dichotomies and assumptions and ignorant perceptions. *If out of the infinite possibilities available in reality, if this yields the best result to fulfill the desired outcome, a creator is obligated to this one and only version logically. Maybe there is only one way that leads to the love desired by a creator, and this is it. Perhaps the only way to obtain His masterpiece is with dark colors. Con wants a masterpiece without enduring the artistry and work that must be endured to ever arrive at that masterpiece. Con demands the easy way out, but there is no easy, nice, pretty way to prove your love to someone or their love to you. Love only shines within the darkness. Here is a video depicting this very concept for those interested. "Let there be Light"(Video) http://youtu.be...