A Challenge to Theists

[benmor78]

First, I would like to address your ill conceived ad hominem. I am not trying to run people down, but instead calling into question what should be a question EVERYONE asks themself in regards to ANY belief.

I wouldn't call it a particularly "ill-conceived" ad hominem. I think it was conceived pretty well, and delivered with just the right dash of panache and flair. I'd say that the tone of your initial post certainly validates my characterization, at least in my mind.

Second, I would like to address my supposed "bashing". It seems that making valid, logical claims in opposition to your claims and asking you to rationally defend your claims is bashing. It's been 6 years since I graduated college, but I was under the impression that this is how rational debate is carried.

You are (or should have been) perfectly aware of how this thread was going to progress. You claim not to be bashing anyone or anything, but this is akin to someone walking into an old west town with six-shooters on their hips, bragging about being the fastest gun west of the Pecos, and then being surprised when someone guns them down. I mean, it's been 3 weeks since my last Mensa meeting, but that's my impression of the situation.

Third, I am a little disturbed that you would accept that belief in a deity as comforting as a legitimate reason for validating it. If we accepted that anything that gives a person solace and comfort is a good thing, we would have to accept all the implications: If a man enjoys rape, he should be allowed. If a woman enjoys mutilating her children, we should allow her to do it. Etc. so on, and so forth.

And I'm a little disturbed that you think belief in a God is analogous or comparable to rape or child mutilation. But I think that the comparison is sufficient to point out that you have a sizable axe to grind vis a vis religion.

Fourth, I have an additional investment in this on several levels:

-I am morally obliged to call into question all beliefs and their rationality
-My profession revolves around history, evolution, and the sciences that revolve around them. The constant incursions by deists on my fields has lead me to believe that it only makes sense for us to question their beliefs as they question the validity of our work.

I have an additional investment, as well:

- I am morally obliged to poke a pin in pretentious windbags.
- My profession revolves around the securities industry, and buying and selling equity instruments. The constant incursions of atheists as pointless irritants on all rational beings interferes with my work.

[benmor78]

BTW... do the religious people that are polluting your academic workplace read and post in this forum?

[Contrickster]

I am extending a challenge to all theists (Christians, Theistic Buddhists, Ba'hai, Muslims, Jews, etc.):

Rationally explain why you believe that there is a deity. Using accepted logic (for a list of fallacious arguments, go to fallacyfiles.org), define each step along the way that provides you proof as to the existence of a deity. If you quote from a source (Bible, Qu'ran, Torah, etc.) as a method of supporting your arguments, give a rigorous explanation as to why the source is valid to quote from without using any tautologies. Be sure to quantify all concepts and axioms that may be vague, arbitrary, or otherwise appearing to be illogical.

If you can beat my logic with better, rational logic, I will concede that there is a god.

For a bonus, if you can present to me evidence that would prove your religious ideology to be the most rational, I will not only accept your religion as the more rational philosophy, but I will argue for it whenever these debates come up.

However, if you cannot overcome my challenge, you must explain why you still hold on to your beliefs, in face of overwhelming intellectual odds.

Proof #1: Kurt Godel

Proved with mathematics there is within a logical system always one unprovable statement. That's why aethist statements God does not exist are baseless.


Proof #2: The Perfect World in Perfect Universe

If you know anything about the world you should be pretty freaked out at it by now.

* Fine-tuned universe
* Life on Earth
* Position of Continents
* Timing of Human Evolution
* Politics, Morals and the Bible


Proof #3: The God Graph

Intelligence increases with time. Rock, slime mold, monkey, Zorg the Neanderthal, Albert Einstein, the Computer ... God.

Infinite time presumes infinite intelligence.

To my knowledge time has never been exactly quantified.

[heavycola]

What does atheism have to do with equities trading? Did I hear the words 'pretentious windbag'? And suggesting that christian belief has been compared iwth rape makes you either a) stupid or b) a disingenuous troll. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.

[Backglass]

I have seen a lame women get up and walk.

I have seen David Copperfield make the statue of liberty disappear!

Why didnt she get up and RUN or do some jumping jacks? Maybe some backflips? She was HEALED BY A GOD...right? Why just walk? Or was this just a partial healing? I challenge you to go visit her today and ask her to take a jog with you. She was HEALED BY A GOD...right? It should be no problem for her.

Jay claims to be healed by a TV preacher of a terminal disease...yet his addiction to cigarettes wasn't. Why? Because it wasn't real. His disease went into remission for other reasons.

Why is it that there has NEVER been an objective, medically verified faith healing? Because they are as FAKE as fake can be. Let's take 1000 "lame" people, have them checked out by a team of physicians, x-rayed, etc. THEN have them healed and see who gets up and runs. It would be INSTANT verification of your god...right? Why isn't this happening? Because...it's all "lame" bullshit.

I have heard the wonderous stories of revival, hope and thousands commiting there life to Jesus.

I have heard the stories of indoctrination, abuse and oppression. I have heard the deluded ramblings of the brainwashed.

I fail to see how hearing stories from others is the "great work of a god".

I have felt Gods power in me, I have felt the holy spirit, I have cried and shouted for Jesus.

The mind is a powerful thing. You have convinced yourself that some supernatural force is working inside you. That force is you. You cry & shout for the benefit of others around you. I'll bet you don't cry and shout when praying all alone.

You will come up with some 'logical solution' to all these great acts of God mainly probably that I am making it up.

And you will wish it all away by saying "gods work in mysterious ways". I dont see how anything you have mentioned is the great act of a supernatural magical god.

Let me ask you this. Why isn't your magical god making paraplegics walk? Why isn't your god restoring the missing limbs of suicide bombed serviceman? Is that TOO GREAT FOR A GOD? Why just the "lame" little old lady in the wheelchair?

Because. It is Grade A BULLSHIT and you took the bait, hook line and sinker.

They may convince others but not me.

Of course not. You are fully brainwashed into your cult. And you will live a very happy and deluded life I am sure.

[RenegadePaddy]

I'm not sure why people on either side of this debate feel that evolution is contrary to the existence of a God. The universe operates according to rules, I don't understand why someone who believes in God would think that God would not choose to operate his plan according to those rules.

*waves* over here chief, one at least in agreement. Look at the order of creation in the bible, and the order things went from big bang to now through science, and tell me you don't see a metaphor to help a more primative culture understand.

Personally, I see God as the reason/starter/insert better term here, and science as his method.

Again, a lot of the trouble comes from the vocal ignorant.

How to spot a vocal ignorant:

Ask your subject: "Do you believe Jesus went into the desert for 40 days and 40 nights?", then apply the response closest to theirs.

1. "Jesus is a mythological figure"

Mark I ignorant - wether he was the son of God, a prophet, or a madman is a subject for debate and personal belief, but there's more evidence that this guy lived than Pythagorus. You do believe Pythagorus lived, don't you?

2. "Of course, the book says 40 days, so he was gone 40 days *add more ramblings*"

Mark II ignornant. This fool is taking the words lkiterally, without any historical knowledge. It remains my favourite example that the phrase '40 days and 40 nights' is an old way of saying 'for a very long time' - much as we today still say'I'll be 5 minutes' when we actualy mean 'I won't be long' - what, you thought God had some special thing for the number 40?

3. "Probably, I mean, the guy went into the desert for a while, but what happened there is a matter to decide for yourself. We know what he said happened, but if you believe him or not is up to you."

Right or wrong, at least this guys looking and thinking, not blinded by ignorance.

[benmor78]

What does atheism have to do with equities trading? Did I hear the words 'pretentious windbag'? And suggesting that christian belief has been compared iwth rape makes you either a) stupid or b) a disingenuous troll. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.

I was simply mocking Jesse's writing style, which should have been fairly obvious.

[boberz]

i cant be bothered to read throught the whole thread but i shall justify why i believe in God.

I believe that it is impossible to prove in the scientific sense of the word because God is outside of logic. We cannot explain everything that is natural e.g. where the gases for the big bang came from (not really looking for a scientific debate on that im sure i could be proved wrong on that one) so how can we try and explain something powerful enough t make the world as God is supernatural.

However i shall try. Firstly we know that Jesus was alive and lived at the time the bible states, this has been proven by archaeologists, and it is a common truth in the archeological world that there is more proof of Jesus than there is of Julius Cesare.

Also many of the miracles have been proven correct such as Samson pulling down a building with super human strength, this really happened they found the building which had collapsed in such a way that it was not natural for buildings especially palaces to collapse, it had almost collapsed on itself as if somebody had pulled it in (oh yeah he did).

Now more of a theory but it makes sense.

Everything we know had to be created some how, nothing can just appear, my explanation God. The common answer to this is that "in that case who made God", good reply, but as i stated earlier God is outside the realms of what we know to be true, God does not have to obey the law of gravity. God being supernatural has to answer to nobody and cannot be governed by relatively small things like gravity, breathing or be created. God cannot be killed or created as he does not exist in the same way we do, that also explains how he can be everywhere and see everything.

Im sure holes will be picked in this but tbh i couldnt care less because come judgement day i know who is going with Jesus to heaven (our promised land) but i pray you come with us and all you have to do is lve and know the lord and make a concious effort ot obey him. I honestly will pray for all those that have not seen the light.

[Backglass]

i cant be bothered to read throught the whole thread but i shall justify why i believe in God.

Yet we are to be bothered by reading your post?

because God is outside of logic.

I will agree with you there.

However i shall try. Firstly we know that Jesus was alive and lived at the time the bible states, this has been proven by archaeologists, and it is a common truth in the archeological world that there is more proof of Jesus than there is of Julius Cesare.

This proves nothing with regard to the existence of gods.

Also many of the miracles have been proven correct such as Samson pulling down a building with super human strength, this really happened they found the building which had collapsed in such a way that it was not natural for buildings especially palaces to collapse, it had almost collapsed on itself as if somebody had pulled it in (oh yeah he did).

Please post a source for this rumor. I would like to see who studied this building that had "collapsed in such a way that it was not natural". I look forward to your links.

Everything we know had to be created some how, nothing can just appear, my explanation God.

Why not? When I say "how long has your god existed" you say "forever". I say the same of our world/universe. It has always been here.

God does not have to obey the law of gravity. God being supernatural has to answer to nobody and cannot be governed by relatively small things like gravity, breathing or be created. God cannot be killed or created as he does not exist in the same way we do, that also explains how he can be everywhere and see everything.

This is the ultimate religious cop out. ANY question thrown your way will be deflected by your giant shield of "we cannot comprehend the mysteries of god".

Im sure holes will be picked in this

It was full of holes already. No picking necessary.

i couldnt care less because come judgement day BLAH BLAH BLAH"

Leave the silly superstitious "DOOM ON YOU!" warnings to jay, would ya?

I hope someday you come to your senses, open your EYES, leave your cult and start living for THIS life instead of your Disneyland fantasy afterlife.

[heavycola]

Backglass, your tireless efforts are worthy of respect.

I would like to formally complain about the use of religious/xian symbols in CC's range of emoticons.

- a dude praying
- an angel
- a creationist listening to reason
- a self-flagellating penitent
- the bad guy
- a happy clapper
These show at best a lack of balance and at worst are typical of the religious right and its efforts to stifle debate and insinuate themselves into every last corner of free thought and reason and i wish to have them removed, as abraham lincoln and thomas jefferson would have wanted also.

[benmor78]

Though I'm not particularly religious, it's these sorts of posts that make me fervently hope that Christians are right, so that you'll be assraped by a demon made of lava.

[Backglass]

Though I'm not particularly religious, it's these sorts of posts that make me fervently hope that Christians are right, so that you'll be assraped by a demon made of lava.

Ass raping demons don't exist. Ass raping priests do exist, however.

[Koba]

I wish I had my old A-level philosophy notes here in Pompey, I love some of the a-priori arguments, but I can't remember them well enough to put them down here using only memory. It's a shame, they are good to argue if people have the brains needed.
Don't want to look more like an arse than needs be though. It's great discussing the existance of God through logic or meaning.

[Jesse, Bad Boy]

First, I would like to address your ill conceived ad hominem. I am not trying to run people down, but instead calling into question what should be a question EVERYONE asks themself in regards to ANY belief.

I wouldn't call it a particularly "ill-conceived" ad hominem. I think it was conceived pretty well, and delivered with just the right dash of panache and flair. I'd say that the tone of your initial post certainly validates my characterization, at least in my mind.

Second, I would like to address my supposed "bashing". It seems that making valid, logical claims in opposition to your claims and asking you to rationally defend your claims is bashing. It's been 6 years since I graduated college, but I was under the impression that this is how rational debate is carried.

You are (or should have been) perfectly aware of how this thread was going to progress. You claim not to be bashing anyone or anything, but this is akin to someone walking into an old west town with six-shooters on their hips, bragging about being the fastest gun west of the Pecos, and then being surprised when someone guns them down. I mean, it's been 3 weeks since my last Mensa meeting, but that's my impression of the situation.

That analogy sucks. A more appropriate analogy would be walking into bar, challenging someone to pinball, and having them rig the machine so that it plays in a way not even resemblant of pinball. The rules were laid out in the beginning, and I dare say anyone who opposes me has followed them. This would suggest that there are few (if any) rational arguments with a deity.

Third, I am a little disturbed that you would accept that belief in a deity as comforting as a legitimate reason for validating it. If we accepted that anything that gives a person solace and comfort is a good thing, we would have to accept all the implications: If a man enjoys rape, he should be allowed. If a woman enjoys mutilating her children, we should allow her to do it. Etc. so on, and so forth.

And I'm a little disturbed that you think belief in a God is analogous or comparable to rape or child mutilation. But I think that the comparison is sufficient to point out that you have a sizable axe to grind vis a vis religion.

I'll address the latter half, as heavycola already addressed the former properly.

I do not have an axe to grind vis a vis religion. Of my best friends, one is a Deistic Buddhist, and another is an Orthodox Jew (and I'll admit that my other two are Atheists). My wife, is a practicing Christian (if only you knew about our arguments on how to bring up the kids). To insinuate that I have some agenda against religion is at the best wrong, at the worst misplaced paranoia.

Fourth, I have an additional investment in this on several levels:

-I am morally obliged to call into question all beliefs and their rationality
-My profession revolves around history, evolution, and the sciences that revolve around them. The constant incursions by deists on my fields has lead me to believe that it only makes sense for us to question their beliefs as they question the validity of our work.

I have an additional investment, as well:

- I am morally obliged to poke a pin in pretentious windbags.
- My profession revolves around the securities industry, and buying and selling equity instruments. The constant incursions of atheists as pointless irritants on all rational beings interferes with my work.

[/quote]

1.What makes me pretentious? Being right? I do not engage in false modesty. If I am better then someone and know it, I will not hide it and will exercise the full extent of my bettered abilities.

2. Athiests are irrational? How so?

[Jesse, Bad Boy]

I'm not sure why people on either side of this debate feel that evolution is contrary to the existence of a God. The universe operates according to rules, I don't understand why someone who believes in God would think that God would not choose to operate his plan according to those rules.

*waves* over here chief, one at least in agreement. Look at the order of creation in the bible, and the order things went from big bang to now through science, and tell me you don't see a metaphor to help a more primative culture understand.

Personally, I see God as the reason/starter/insert better term here, and science as his method.

Again, a lot of the trouble comes from the vocal ignorant.

How to spot a vocal ignorant:

Ask your subject: "Do you believe Jesus went into the desert for 40 days and 40 nights?", then apply the response closest to theirs.

1. "Jesus is a mythological figure"

Mark I ignorant - wether he was the son of God, a prophet, or a madman is a subject for debate and personal belief, but there's more evidence that this guy lived than Pythagorus. You do believe Pythagorus lived, don't you?

We've already done this thread, and MR. Nate was thoroughly whipped. If you care to make your own response, feel free to find the thread entitled "Jesus Myth", or something like that.

2. "Of course, the book says 40 days, so he was gone 40 days *add more ramblings*"

Mark II ignornant. This fool is taking the words lkiterally, without any historical knowledge. It remains my favourite example that the phrase '40 days and 40 nights' is an old way of saying 'for a very long time' - much as we today still say'I'll be 5 minutes' when we actualy mean 'I won't be long' - what, you thought God had some special thing for the number 40?

3. "Probably, I mean, the guy went into the desert for a while, but what happened there is a matter to decide for yourself. We know what he said happened, but if you believe him or not is up to you."

Right or wrong, at least this guys looking and thinking, not blinded by ignorance.

I feel compelled to comment on your lack of historical integrity. If we accepted that a Jesus's stay in the desert for 40 days/nights as embellishment or metaphor, how are we to accept it as legitimate source of historical materials? How do we know what has and has not been tampered with?

[Jesse, Bad Boy]

I am extending a challenge to all theists (Christians, Theistic Buddhists, Ba'hai, Muslims, Jews, etc.):

Rationally explain why you believe that there is a deity. Using accepted logic (for a list of fallacious arguments, go to fallacyfiles.org), define each step along the way that provides you proof as to the existence of a deity. If you quote from a source (Bible, Qu'ran, Torah, etc.) as a method of supporting your arguments, give a rigorous explanation as to why the source is valid to quote from without using any tautologies. Be sure to quantify all concepts and axioms that may be vague, arbitrary, or otherwise appearing to be illogical.

If you can beat my logic with better, rational logic, I will concede that there is a god.

For a bonus, if you can present to me evidence that would prove your religious ideology to be the most rational, I will not only accept your religion as the more rational philosophy, but I will argue for it whenever these debates come up.

However, if you cannot overcome my challenge, you must explain why you still hold on to your beliefs, in face of overwhelming intellectual odds.

Proof #1: Kurt Godel

Proved with mathematics there is within a logical system always one unprovable statement. That's why aethist statements God does not exist are baseless.

Flawed.

First, Godel's theorems only apply to systems that are used as their own proof systems.

Second, the systems have to meet his hypotheses, which most philosophical systems do not.

Godels Incompleteness theorum was only meant for certain mathematics, not philosophy. The idea that it can be used as a method of disproving the logical holes in the Christian arguments is false, and has been propagated to the point of distortion.

Proof #2: The Perfect World in Perfect Universe

If you know anything about the world you should be pretty freaked out at it by now.

* Fine-tuned universe

The Universe is not finely tuned. But, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. Explain this.

* Life on Earth

What about it?

* Position of Continents

Tectonic shift is a result of a creator? Please, tell me more about this.

* Timing of Human Evolution

Oh lord, there was special timing to it now? Do tell.

* Politics, Morals and the Bible

Politics? What does that have to do with anything?

Morals? I have morals. Are you insinuating that those without a god are immoral?

The Bible? I can recall several other authors who wrote fairy tales and mythologies.

Proof #3: The God Graph

Intelligence increases with time. Rock, slime mold, monkey, Zorg the Neanderthal, Albert Einstein, the Computer ... God.

Infinite time presumes infinite intelligence.

To my knowledge time has never been exactly quantified.

That's a baseless assumption, and an appeal to the consequences. Moreover, it's a case of post hoc, ergo propter hoc.

[benmor78]

That analogy sucks. A more appropriate analogy would be walking into bar, challenging someone to pinball, and having them rig the machine so that it plays in a way not even resemblant of pinball. The rules were laid out in the beginning, and I dare say anyone who opposes me has followed them. This would suggest that there are few (if any) rational arguments with a deity.

Anyone who opposes you has followed your rules? Well, then, what's the problem? And I didn't think anyone here was arguing with a deity...

Third, I am a little disturbed that you would accept that belief in a deity as comforting as a legitimate reason for validating it. If we accepted that anything that gives a person solace and comfort is a good thing, we would have to accept all the implications: If a man enjoys rape, he should be allowed. If a woman enjoys mutilating her children, we should allow her to do it. Etc. so on, and so forth.

And I'm a little disturbed that you think belief in a God is analogous or comparable to rape or child mutilation. But I think that the comparison is sufficient to point out that you have a sizable axe to grind vis a vis religion.

I'll address the latter half, as heavycola already addressed the former properly.

No, he didn't. You compared religion to rape and child mutilation, which is a pretty cheap tactic for someone who is trying to claim the moral high ground for "rational debate."

I do not have an axe to grind vis a vis religion. Of my best friends, one is a Deistic Buddhist, and another is an Orthodox Jew (and I'll admit that my other two are Atheists). My wife, is a practicing Christian (if only you knew about our arguments on how to bring up the kids). To insinuate that I have some agenda against religion is at the best wrong, at the worst misplaced paranoia.

Uh huh... 50 years ago, people used to say "some of my best friends are black." Good job.

1.What makes me pretentious? Being right? I do not engage in false modesty. If I am better then someone and know it, I will not hide it and will exercise the full extent of my bettered abilities.

Hardly. But I'm sure you felt great the one or two times you've been in a position to exercise the "full extent of your bettered abilities."

2. Athiests are irrational? How so?

Evangelical atheists are irritants.

[Backglass]

My profession revolves around the securities industry, and buying and selling equity instruments.

Your mom was right...you should have gone to medical school so you could have a respectable job.

The constant incursions of atheists as pointless irritants on all rational beings interferes with my work.

I see.

Not believing in magical, invisible, supernatural creatures makes one irrational.

Gotcha!

[benmor78]

I said that evangelical atheists are irritants to rational people, not that evangelical atheists aren't rational.

[Backglass]

I said that evangelical atheists are irritants to rational people, not that evangelical atheists aren't rational.

I see.

Believing in magical, invisible, supernatural creatures makes one rational.

Gotcha!

[benmor78]

No. I didn't say that only religious people were rational. I said that rational people are irritated by evangelical atheists.

[Backglass]

No. I didn't say that only religious people were rational. I said that rational people are irritated by evangelical atheists.

I see.

Much like rational people are irritated by evangelical christians.

Gotcha!

[benmor78]

Certainly. Evangelical atheists (like yourself and the bad boy) are just as irritating as evangelical Christians. I said that earlier in the thread.

[The1exile]

To you, maybe. I find Backglass' posts informative and witty, unlike jay's, which sound like he's been programmed to spread the word of god as literal (unless he disagrees with it) to the informed majority. People like him kill my faith.

[Backglass]

Certainly. Evangelical atheists (like yourself and the bad boy) are just as irritating as evangelical Christians.

Evangelical huh. Funny!

Does this make Jamie an Evangelical Ass?