who gives jesus authority?

Sent by God? Just appeared. No views. Church cancelled for storm. Is this my lesson? Thank you Father.

Great message. Just what I needed!

I have never encountered any evidence that suggests the existence of a god.

What we have here is a classic case of what I call theocentrism: the unquestioned - and often unnoticed - assumption that if existence is due to some theistic meddling, it simply _has to be_ your god or, in the case of atheists who flub this, the god or gods of _your_ culture. This ignorant, unjustified, presuppositional notion is helped along by the fact that the name "God" and the general term "god" are pronounced the same, allowing apologists to play fast and loose with the two and get away with philosophical murder. Pastors and apologists will create videos ostensibly criticizing atheism but then they blather on about the perils and pitfalls of not accepting "God." The Xian god. But if not accepting God is the problem then it's only incidentally about atheists. It's really about _all non-Xians!_ Atheists are outnumbered internationally at least 4-to-1 by religious theists who refuse God. They have their own gods, none of whom is God. Their attitudes toward God are the same as atheists': nonbelievers, disbelievers and deniers. Except you will find far higher rates of disbelief and denial of God among non-Xian theists than among atheists. Most atheists are nonbelievers in God (and all gods) but nonbelief in God is rare among non-Xian theists. Most disbelieve in God or deny God outright. But if not accepting God is the crux, then why are Xian apologists picking on atheists? Why don't we hear apologists criticizing non-Xian theists far more? I'll tell you why! Because they fear that to do so would bring charges of extra-religious intolerance. But atheists are fair game; a convenient whipping boy for them to strawman and then use that caricature as a foil to justify their smug sanctimony. But it's toddler-level easy for these apologists to show that it's only atheists they are vilifying and not the billions of religious theists who also eschew, abjure or deny God. When describing atheists or atheism, always use the lower-case "g" and _pluralize!_ Say it with me: "gods." Or say "a god" or "any gods." If it's about not accepting "God," then billions of religious theists are included. If it's about "gods," then God, being a god, is necessarily already included. If it's about "atheism," then apologists would be happy to see all atheists convert to devotees of the Hawaiian shark god Kamohoali'i because then atheism would be gone, right? Theists and atheists alike refuse God. Only atheists refuse gods. Listen closely to how apologists use the "G" word when maligning atheists and always ask yourself: wouldn't "gods" or "a god" or "any gods" have been better? Will apologists ever make this slight adjustment to achieve way better clarity? Ha! Pipe dream!

Why is it foolish to say "There is no God"? Because atheism is an attitude about _gods_ All gods. Not just God. And yes, a rare few atheists say "There are no gods." But that's an assertion and calls for proof, and vis-a-vis gods that's a tall order. Disproving God is easy for the bible describes God in contradictory ways, but disproving all gods? Good luck w/that! To understand atheism, just compare gods to other hypothetical beings e.g. Martian microbes. Do they exist? Most people are neutral; nonbelievers. Some, like me, are disbelievers. I believe/presume Mars is sterile, based on certain facts. A rare few people are deniers: They claim to _know_ Martian germs don't exist even though they can't prove it. That's foolish. But believing no gods exist is easily justifiable, if not provable. Nonbelievers, disbelievers, deniers. What's happening is that theists are trying to portray atheism as strictly disbelief or denialism while confused atheists try to define atheism as strictly nonbelief. It can be any of the three. Wiki has a good definition.