Tuesday, 29 April 2008

Bring Your Sunday Best


Following up on yesterday's post, we always hear that there are wonderful arguments for god and tons of evidence. Ask about either of these, however, and the only sound you invariably hear is crickets chirping. So, how about it? Theist readers, bring your evidence and arguments for god. Bring the good ones that I keep hearing about. Dust off your arguments from C.S. Lewis, Aquinas, or Plantinga and astound us. I'm an open-minded fellow and if your argument is good enough you could convert a heathen!

UPDATE (5/11/08): It's been almost 2 weeks and after 18 comments there have been zero arguments for god or Xianity presented, zero evidence presented, and a whole lot of anger from Xians. One Xian commenter has had the intellectual honesty to admit that (s)he has no evidence, and for that I applaud her/him. Where are the great arguments for Xianity I'm always hearing so much about?

24 comments:

Gatsby Blastyn said...

Wow. Another angry atheist letting his/her emotion whip them all over the place.

This blog is a joke.

MR. X said...

I failed to see gct's anger there. Hardly comparable to the clergymen of my youth.

And yes, this blog is a joke. It shouldn't be necessary to promote rational behaviour in 21st century America.

GCT said...

I ask for arguments in favor of Xianity and theology, and I get a tired, old canard about how atheists must be angry. Yes, it must seem so emotionally overwhelming of me to ask for non-emotional evidence. How dare I.

Steven Bently said...

Why do atheists show so much anger and hatred, when they ask for evidence?

Solaris Roscita said...

Why do xians never provide any?

Gatsby Blastyn said...

This has nothing to do with evidence.
This is just me laughing at your pathetic, emotive, knee jerk reaction to theistic beliefs.

Because it's little more than that. You go around and litter your link on sites that you disagree with. Never actually addressing the topics.... and if you do your only real 'weapon' is derision.
I'm glad this blog is up. If for no other reason than it shows the desperation of your position. "Why I hate Jesus"??? And you wonder why you are not taken seriously?
Who knows, maybe you don't wonder that.

Solaris Roscita said...

And yet, the only weapon you use in retaliation is that very same which you accuse us of! I have said it before - religious people are not capable of honest self-analysis. It is not a trait specific to them, but it is nonetheless a widespread trait in that specific subset of people.

And you know what else? You seem pretty angry yourself, so if you don't mind me saying, you have become a hypocrite. That's just too bad, for you: now only the incredibly stupid will take you seriously.

The truth is though, that religion does anger me, because those brainwashed by it have become slaves to an untruth, and to an elite that truly does not deserve it's status. Slavery, I think, should rightly anger me, in all it's many forms. Much the same as this, I am angered by political oppression, intellectual misdirection, and many other things (like world hunger, the widespread inequality of wealth (creating unnecessary deaths of those in poverty)) that I see around the world.

See now if you can actually be polite in your response. I bet you can't, and I am sure it is a bet I shall win.

David Mabus said...

http://www.rock-explosion.com/images/finger.jpg

the *MODEL* of mental health:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=zBEbfiaZTfc

"Look at the ANGLE OF THE KEY....see that, see that...."

what an idiot this Randi is.....a REAL CRITICAL THINKER.....

for all the victims of Randi's monstrous idea.......

Visit:

http://www.centerforinquiry.net/forums/viewthread/3283/P0/

to see how we stopped James Randi's fraudulent MILLION DOLLAR PARANORMAL challenge.....

watch carefully the consequences of Randi's *idea*…..

For over 40 years James Randi Zwigert (is this even a REAL NAME?) has had total control over who and how the testing was conducted, yet despite all this he has terminated the challenge.

The ONLY REASON why the challenge was stopped is because he lost and refused to pay.

Apparently, Randi likes to break the rules when it serves him:

"14. This prize will continue to be offered until it is awarded. Upon the death of James Randi, the administration of the prize will pass into other hands, and it is intended that it continue in force. "

Great force.....it's over......

where is my MILLION DOLLARS, you LITTLE *NO-NAME* FRAUD

PS: Almost Forgot: Love the IRONY of the *BULLSHIT* sign over Randi's ugly head....

GCT said...

"This has nothing to do with evidence."

I ask for evidence for god and I get a polemic about what I want which tells me that I want the exact opposite of what I specifically said I want. This, is the level of conversation that you bring?

"This is just me laughing at your pathetic, emotive, knee jerk reaction to theistic beliefs."

This comment is rather odd. Knee-jerk reaction? Emotive? Asking for evidence is neither of those. And, the former is especially odd in this country where the knee-jerk reaction is not anti-religious, but pro-religious. If anything, what I'm getting is a knee-jerk reaction from you Gatsby, that atheists must be angry and wrong.

"Never actually addressing the topics.... and if you do your only real 'weapon' is derision."

At what time have I used derision? That's your tactic, not mine.

"I'm glad this blog is up. If for no other reason than it shows the desperation of your position."

What desperation? If anyone should be in a desperate position, it is the theist. How many years have people believed in god? Yet, in all those years, scant evidence has been found for this supposed god. In fact, the more we find out, the less likely it is that a god does exist. Your god is finding smaller and smaller gaps to hide in by the day, church attendance is declining, Islam might be the fastest growing religion (Xians hate that, don't they?) but non-religion is growing even faster according to some studies. And, in the realm of logic, my position is the rational one to take. So, why is it that you think I'm desperate?

GCT said...

I can't tell if Mr. Mabus is satirizing or not. It's sad when the real thing becomes so ridiculous that you can't even tell anymore.

word said...

I am a Christian. What I believe cannot be proved to you. I can tell you that sugar tastes sweet, but you cannot understand sweet until you taste it for yourself. I am not alarmed that I cannot provide evidence for you and yet I do hope that you find it. It seems that you do actually want to locate this validation.

GCT said...

Thank you word for being so forthright about the lack of evidence. But, no, I'm not looking for a reason to believe. Surprisingly enough for some, I rather like being an atheist. I opened my mind and saw through the BS that is religious thought and am now living a life devoid of all the baggage that accompanies Xianity. Atheists are not angry or sad simply by virtue of being atheists.

word said...

What I do not understand is why you would hate Jesus. Your belief that he was only a man - well, did he do something that would warrant your ill will? Perhaps your hate is more focused on those people who have (in your way of thinking?) brought his teachings forward and created this really "big deal?" But as for what he taught, don't you think he said some good things? It seems that regardless of your belief in deity, you might find something of benefit in what he had to say.
I guess I am asking, do you really hate him - as we strive to understand him through historical texts...or do you hate the theological avalanche that occurred after his "snowflake" touched the earth?
I appreciate your being willing to let me know where you are coming from.

GCT said...

Word,
I don't really hate Jesus. It's impossible to hate something that you don't believe exists/existed. There is scant evidence for a historical Jesus, and no evidence for a divine Jesus or a god. So, I certainly can't hate something that doesn't exist (or at least something I don't believe exists). The blog title is actually Mr. X's as it is his blog. I just write here. It should also be noted that the title is hyperbole.

Did Jesus say some good things? I think the more correct question would be to ask whether good teachings are attributed to Jesus. In that case, I would argue that it's a mixed bag. I've been thinking about a post on this subject, so I'll defer to my upcoming post (tomorrow if I have time).

"Perhaps your hate is more focused on those people who have (in your way of thinking?) brought his teachings forward and created this really "big deal?""

It's actually hard for me to hate anyone. I do, however, dislike immensely some of the things that happen in the name of religion. Evolution denial is one thing, but don't try to teach it to other people's kids. Don't try to indoctrinate others in your beliefs. Don't start wars over who has a better god, etc. Note, I'm not accusing you specifically of doing any of this, just speaking generally.

word said...

Would you mind if I say you interest me? Many times I meet atheists and their speech and behaviors appear so very defensive. I suppose it is because atheists feel they are swimming up stream and therefore must always be "pumped up" to continue the battle of survival (?)
You, on the other hand, seem to have a gentle way about you...a person with patience. It is compelling.
I do think Jesus is attributed to saying some very good things. Though I have not spent time scouring historical facts about who has written and said such and such; I do know that Jesus himself is not attributed to writing as much as one word. I will look forward to your article on the writings attributed to Jesus.
I must keep it short as I am gathering with a group that I have much in common with and we don't wear our Sunday Best! I will probably wear jeans. Yes I am going to church.
By the way, I have no specific problem with evolution as I see it as an important and fascinating part of life.

GCT said...

"Many times I meet atheists and their speech and behaviors appear so very defensive."

Take care that you don't push your biases onto those you converse with. It might be that you are imagining that they are defensive when they might not be.

"I suppose it is because atheists feel they are swimming up stream and therefore must always be "pumped up" to continue the battle of survival (?)"

There is some truth to that. In this country there is a distinct Xian bias that pervades.

"You, on the other hand, seem to have a gentle way about you...a person with patience. It is compelling."

I try to be patient, but I'm not always so. But, thank you.

"I will look forward to your article on the writings attributed to Jesus."

It is now up.

"By the way, I have no specific problem with evolution as I see it as an important and fascinating part of life."

Good.

david said...

FINAL DRAFT:

please FWD to randi@randi.org and richard.dawkins@oum.ox.ac.uk

SEE HOW WE CAUSED THE PRESIDENT OF AMERICAN ATHEISTS, ELLEN JOHNSON,
TO QUIT HER JOB AND HOW WE STOPPED RANDI’S MILLION DOLLAR PARANORMAL
CHALLENGE:

for randi & dawkins and all the so-called “critical thinkers”

http://thomashawk.com/hello/209/1017/1024/Johnny%20Cash%20Finger.jpg

the ORIGINAL *KING OF TERROR* VIDEO.....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zGsOqPDkIZY

the *MODEL* of mental health:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=zBEbfiaZTfc

“Look at the ANGLE OF THE KEY....see that, see that....”

what an idiot this Randi is.....a REAL CRITICAL THINKER....

Visit:

http://nostradamus-usa.netfirms.com

to see how we stopped the MILLION DOLLAR PARANORMAL challenge.....
watch carefully the consequences of Randi’s *idea*.....

For over 40 years James Randi Zwigert (is this even a REAL NAME?) has
had total control over who and how the testing was conducted, yet
despite all this he has terminated the challenge.

The ONLY REASON why the challenge was stopped is because he lost and
refused to pay.
Apparently, Randi likes to break the rules when it serves him:

“14. This prize will continue to be offered until it is awarded. Upon
the death of James Randi, the administration of the prize will pass
into other hands, and it is intended that it continue in force. “

Great force.....it’s over......

where is my MILLION DOLLARS, you LITTLE *NO-NAME* FRAUD
PS: Almost Forgot: Love the IRONY of the *BULLSHIT* sign over Randi’s
ugly head....

GCT said...

I'm calling Poe's Law on this one.

Question of Identity said...

'I'm an open minded fellow'

You prove to me that you are open minded and I will show you that God exists. Until then there is no point discussing the matter.

My desire is to come across without any anger - and indeed I am not at all angry with you, but I am angry at the Devil who has so blinded you. There is unfortunately no sign what so ever that you are open minded at all.

GCT said...

QOI,
"You prove to me that you are open minded and I will show you that God exists. Until then there is no point discussing the matter."

Well, I'm an atheist due to having an open mind, but that's beside the point. This is rather disappointing. It's like you are saying, "I have all this evidence, but I'm not telling you." Why not? Present your evidence if you have it.

"My desire is to come across without any anger - and indeed I am not at all angry with you, but I am angry at the Devil who has so blinded you."

Why does god allow the devil to blind people and imperil their immortal souls? Wouldn't a loving god stop this kind of thing?

"There is unfortunately no sign what so ever that you are open minded at all."

Let me ask you this, what evidence would you need to think that I'm open minded?

Wallis said...

There is no evidence that God exists. Perhaps it is the very lack of evidence that proclaims that God does indeed exist.

Empirically, we are left with only a few choices.

All things that happen in the universe are random and have little in common with each other.

Some things that happen in the universe interact, and we call them coincidences.

When looking back upon the significant events in life (I feel we should include some of the more so-called insignificant events), either something of design manufactured these coincidences OR everything that happens in life is merely a huge collection of coincidences.

I have yet to meet a scientist that will support the theory that all things that happen in life are coincidences.

Before one can begin any kind of investigation of God, one must first define what they expect God is. Akin to scientists trying to explore the nucleus of the atom and reach the "bottom" layer or nugget, they had to make certain definitions of what they thought they might look for. Even so, they are constantly surprised at what they are finding.

If we are looking for proof of a Jewish God, we are out of luck.

If we are looking for proof of a Christian God, again, we are out of luck.

If we are looking for proof of any mythological god, we modern people will probably end up with some kind of physical explanation. Then, we will end the discussion there and proclaim tha there are no mythological gods. Too bad, too, because a lot can be learned from why people came up the concept of these gods in the first place.

Secondly, we need a place to start looking for God. At least scientists have an atom to look at and begin their search.

If we want to look for God, however, then reading any kind of scripture is the wrong starting place. You will not find God in scriptures; you will find what a lot of people think God is. And their opinions are equally valid and invalid as the next person.

We could start to look for God by sitting out in our lawn in an easy chair and observing nature. Not a good start either, because you will be able to construct a scientific analysis of how organisms develop and interact with each other.

So, where is the starting point? It is, silly enough, inside of you.

Each of us in this world lives in our own universe. Each of us has a god in whom we trust, as well as construct. That god could be as nebulous as hydrogen gas, or it could be as concrete as a block of stone. It could also be just us: we are the god of our own universe.

If we have problem just finding out about ourselves, then we are never really going to able to search for God, define God, and then begin to build a proof for God's existence.

GCT said...

Wallis,
"There is no evidence that God exists."

Thank you for that frank admission.

"Perhaps it is the very lack of evidence that proclaims that God does indeed exist."

Permit me to be very unconvinced. Are you seriously claiming that lack of evidence is now proof of something's existence? Well, permit me to believe that Russell's floating teapot exists, that there are ice cream parlors on the largest moon of Jupiter, that gravity is really pushing me away from the planet, etc. The problem with your assertion is that it is completely irrational and illogical, as I think I've just demonstrated.

word said...

I fail to see what anyone gets out of these diatribes. Each of us believes in our own specific way. For me it is not important that I convince anyone to believe the way I do, but my beliefs are solid and cannot be moved by any human being. Period. As a psychotherapist, I have read these comments occasionally to understand the mindset behind these nearly desperate desires to change another person's belief system.
I have one idea that I will share and do not intend to debate it. I believe that the majority of you have the need to convince another to believe your way in order to assuage and prove (to yourself) that your thoughts and ideas have validity.

GCT said...

Word,
"I have one idea that I will share and do not intend to debate it. I believe that the majority of you have the need to convince another to believe your way in order to assuage and prove (to yourself) that your thoughts and ideas have validity."

Yes, I believe that is why theists come here to proselytize and proselytize in general. My motivation is different. You obviously haven't read too much here if you don't know that, because I've stated it many times. If theists persist in trying to push their religious nonsense on me and others, I will speak out against them. It has nothing to do with any insecurity in my position. In fact, there is no reason for me to feel insecure in my position at all and no need for me to have to validate my position. That burden of proof is up to the theist. Until the theist can support the assertion of a god, I am holding the rational high ground (actually, the only rational position). Hence, I have no need to validate what is the default rational position.