15 common christian questions answered

Loc
Superfan
Loc's picture
Posts: 1130
Joined: 2007-11-06
User is offlineOffline
15 common christian questions answered

Behold, my latest work. I've tried to answer 15 common christian questions in a short and easy to read format. Thought it might be a good resource to point new xtian posters to when they come with Pascal's Wager. As always, critisism is welcome, and nominations for other questions to answer.

 

 

Common christian arguments

(In no particular order)

1.     Pascal’s Wager

Premises: You have everything to gain by believing, and everything to lose by not. So why not believe?/What if you’re wrong?

 

Problem: What if you’re wrong and allah is the true god? Pascal never indicated which god we should believe in. With thousands of them out there, they chances are choosing the right one are slim. If you are a christian and allah is the right choice, you’re going to have a small problem after death. Isn’t it more logical to choose none? It also assumes that god isn’t going to mind you just believing because you don’t want to go to hell, and doesn’t want true followers.

 

2.Argument from ignorance

   Premises: Atheism is not a logical position to hold, because to say you know there is no god, you would have to be all-present and knowing. You would have to be god.

 

Problem: There are several flaws here. Firstly, not many atheists will claim to know beyond a doubt there is no god. It is impossible to prove a negative. They have no belief in one.

 

Secondly, it is just as impossible for a theist to prove there is a god without ultimate knowledge. More so, since the burden of proof rests with them.

 

Thirdly, by this reasoning, every god and imaginary creature ever created must exist, since you can’t prove it false. This means yahweh is not the only god, and christianity is negated.

 

Just because you can’t prove something false, doesn’t mean it’s true.

 

3.    Atheism is a religion/ atheists have faith.

Premises: Exactly what it says in the title

 

Problem: Atheism is a religion like bald is a hair color, off is a tv channel, and not playing football is a sport. It is the lack of belief. The Cambridge online dictionary defines religion as  “the belief in and worship of a god or gods, or any such system of belief and worship.’’

An atheist has neither belief in any gods, nor worships any. Religion can also be defined as “a set of rituals and ceremonies pertaining to a deity.” Again, this is not demonstrated in the atheist’s life.

I will assume the Christian reader does not believe in Thor. Is you’re a-Thorism a religion? Do you call yourself a follower of the ‘There is no Thor faith’, and go to Thor unbelief church? No.

 

4.    Appeal to Popularity

Premises: Billions of people have believed in christianity. If it’s wrong, why would so many believe it?

Problem: There was once a time when everybody believed that the earth was flat. Just because people believed that, doesn’t make it true.             

 

5.Watchmaker Argument

Premises: If you were walking along and found a watch, you would note it’s complexity and conclude someone had designed it. It is the same with the natural world. Everything needs a creator.

 

Problem: Watches are designed. We know this because we can go to the watch factory and talk to the designer, and see the plans and processed for it. I’ve yet to see anyone do this with the universes’ supposed creator. Watches are non-organic things, and therefore couldn’t naturally evolve. Of course you wouldn’t think it just grew there. You might with a plant though. It is interesting to note that while this is n argument against evolution, watches evolve in their own way. The complex digital watch you found started as a simple sundial. In using this argument, the creationist must give credence to evolution.

 

This boils down to everything created needs a creator. The thing here is, who created god?

If nothing, then everything, including the world, does not need a creator. There is no reason to believe creationism.

If something, then god is not the universe’s creator. There is no reason to believe creationism.

 

6.    Argument from fine tuning/Improbability

Premises: The earth is just right for life. A bit more that way, it would too cold. A bit, more that way, too hot. It has just the right kind of atmosphere,  nice solar system with a asteroid belt that protects us from errant meteors that could hit the earth, etc. Or just look at us. See how complex the eye is. That couldn’t have just happened.

 

Problem: So the earth is just right for life and life happens to exist there? Didn’t see that coming! This doesn’t seem as amazing when you realize there are billions of planets, around billions of stars. Given the astronomical numbers worked with here, it isn’t that unlikely one would  have the right conditions for life to appear. In fact, the universe speaks against intelligent design. So many galaxies and dead planets, so one can have life? It resembles far more the result one would get from an event such as the Big Bang.

The earth itself does not seem so intelligently designed. 70% of it is water, not much good for us non-gilled humans. Of the remaining land, much is in-hospitable dessert or ice land.  Why would god give us one planet in the whole universe and make most of it useless?

 

It is the same if we look at the eye. Yes, it is very unlikely it just appeared. Remember to factor in  few million years though, and it’s not so unbelievable that it manage to work it’s way here. If it was intelligently designed, why do so many people need glasses, and why are eyes so sensitive and easy to injure?

 

 

7.    Atheists are just as bad as christians, cramming their beliefs down peoples throats.

 

Problem: When last did you see atheists going door to door?

When last did you see an atheist tv channel preaching to people?

When last did you have to see a monument of Richard Dawkins quotes in a courtroom?

When last did you see children going to a private atheist school were they are taught to distrust theists?

 

8.     So what if  people believe something else. Why not just let them be?

Problem:  Remember the Twin Towers? Want to live in a world were stem cell research could prolong lives? Then speak out against religion. If an adult still believed in Santa, wouldn’t you feel compelled to put them straight? Religion is severely dangerous to our world. Try find a war that didn’t have religious influence behind it. Whenever there is religion, knowledge is shunned and ridiculed.

Most christians think the world would be great if everyone thought like they did. We had that once. It was called the Dark Age, and it set humanity back possibly centuries. The fact is, people will rather vote for someone who has no qualification except believing in god, than a highly capable person who doesn’t.

People once believed demons caused illness and drilling holes in peoples head was considered the cutting edge of medicine. If that’s  the world you want, keep up your religion.

 

9.     How can you be moral without god?

Premises: It is impossible to be moral, the bible is the ultimate source of morality.

Problem: This is very insulting to the atheist, and completely baseless. First you have to accept the bible is the source of morality. There is no reason to believe anything in it is true, and do you really want to live by a book that has this:

Killing innocent babies-Exodus 12:29

You must kill your child if they disobey you-Exodus 21:15

Beat your slave, just make sure he doesn’t die! Exodus 21:20-21

They complete destruction of peoples, including infants, women, and animals. 1 Samuel 15:2-3

Giving your daughter away to her cousin in payment for his killing someone. Joshua 15:16-17

Condones child sacrifice. Judges 11:29-40

Sell your clothes to buy swords. Luke 22:36

Less than 1% of America’s prison population is atheist. (http://www.adherents.com/misc/adh_prison.html ) Even if those numbers are skewed, there are still a lot more christians than atheists in prison. Obviously, there are a lot more christians than atheists in every facet of American life, but should there be any in prison in the first place if they have the moral high ground?

The buckle of the Bible Belt has extremely high levels of teen pregnancy, (http://www.physorg.com/news104658683.html )violence,( Louisiana has the highest churchgoing rate in the country, but its murder rate is more than twice the national average) and religious intolerance . Why if christians are so much better?

10. You’re an atheist because you hate god.

Problem: Do you not believe in Santa because you hate him? Atheists may be resentful or angry about their former theism and that they were lied to, but you can’t hate something you don’t believe in.

11.      

   11. Hitler and Stalin were atheist, they killed millions.

 

Problem: There is little evidence Hitler was atheist. He made many remarks consistent with a belief in god, such as:

 

 ‘Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator, by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord” –Mein Kampf, pg 65

 

“We were convinced that the people needs and requires this faith. We have therefore undertaken the fight against the atheistic movement, and that not merely with a few theoretical declarations: we have stamped it out.”- in a speech delivered in Berlin, October 24, 1933.

 

‘We don’t want to educate anyone in atheism.’-Table-Talk ,pg 6

 

‘I am now as before a Catholic and will always remain so.’-from John Toland ,Adolf Hitler, New York: Anchor Publishing, 1992, p. 507.

 

It is interesting to note Hitler was never excommunicated from the church, as opposed to say , Galileo , who was only pardoned in 1992.Furhtermore, his campaign against Jews was possible largely because of anti-Semitic preaching’s by the church for hundreds of years.

 

It is likely Hitler simply choose to say whatever his particular audience wanted to hear in regard to belief. There is no reason he should be called atheist.

 

Stalin may have been an atheist, but christians overlook one obvious fact. He killed in the name of Communism, not atheism. Communism is in itself a religion, where the state and leader are worshiped, as opposed to a deity.

Neither of these men, or any other leader I’m aware of, ever killed in the name of atheism.

 

12.Evolution is just a theory.

 

   Problem: So is gravity. Now go fly away. The word theory has different meanings in laymen and scientific contexts. In science it is something that has been tested and has evidence supporting it.

Example: The Theory of Gravity, Atomic Cell Theory

In science, something can be both theory and fact.

 

13. Argument from personal experience.

 

Premises: I know god’s real because I’ve felt him! I’ve seen miracles! How do you explain that?

 

Problem: I know god’s not real because he told me so! See, just you because you say something, don’t make it so. Christians will usually resort to the personal experience argument when all other arguments have dried up, because it is impossible to prove or disprove.  The thing is, many people have had the personal experience of seeing Elvis, getting abducted by aliens, and having the CIA secretly spy on them. Shall we now afford all these claims complete credibility?

As a former Christian, I’ve had personal experiences. However, when you remove the blind faith and indoctrination, you realize they are the product of highly emotional settings, usually combined with peer pressure. Everyone around me is talking in tongues! I better do something. The mind’s capability for imagination is vast, and if you want something to be badly enough, you will likely experience it.

That which can be presented without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

 

14. Most of the great scientists believed in god! Einstein believed in god! Are you smarter than him?

Problem:  Most of the great historical scientists (Newton, Kepler, etc) lived in times when not being a christian or opposing the church meant at worst death, at best rejection or exile. (see: Galileo) Moving into the 20th and 21st centuries, the correlation between christian and scientist drops sharply.

From The God Delusion, pg 126:

“The only website I could find that claimed to list “Nobel-Prize winning Scientific- Christians” came up with six, out of a total of several hundred scientific Nobelists. Of these six, it turns out that four were not Noble-Prize winners at all; and at least one, to my certain knowledge, is a non-believer who attends church purely for social reasons.”

“A study in the leading journal Nature by Larson and Witham in 1998 showed that of those American scientists considered imminent enough by their peers to be selected to the National Academy of Sciences … only about 7 percent believed in a personal God.”

Einstein was at best a deist. Yet more quotes:

“ It is of course a lie what you have read about my religious conviction, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God  and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbound admiration for the structure of our world so far as our science can reveal it.”-1954, in The Human Side

“I cannot imagine a God who rewards and punishes the objects of his creation, whose purposes are modeled after our own- a God, in short, who is but a reflection of human fragility. Neither can I believe that an individual survives the death of his body, although feeble souls harbor such thoughts through fear or ridiculous egotisms.”- 19 April 1995, Breaking the Last Taboo

[mod edit: Einstein was originally quoted on Nov. 9, 1930 in the New York Times.  James Haught included this quote in Breaking the Last Taboo, 1996.  http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/james_haught/index.html  --Hambydammit]

 

15. Everyone needs to believe in something. It’s comforting.

Problem: Believing in christianity may be comforting at times, but only in the way that telling a small child a deceased person has gone for a sleep. It’s still a lie, and shouldn’t be found in adults who have the intelligence to know better.

You can believe in yourself. Believe in your capability and intelligence as a human being to make your life better and accomplish your goals. Wouldn’t you agree that’s a better approach than sitting back and waiting for a magical god to fix all your problems? All believing in a religion does is teach you to never question or grow, and sugarcoat the pressing issues of humanity.

Psalm 14:1 "the fool hath said in his heart there is a God"-From a 1763 misprinted edition of the bible

dudeofthemoment wrote:
This is getting redudnant. My patience with the unteachable[atheists] is limited.

Argument from Sadism: Theist presents argument in a wall of text with no punctuation and wrong spelling. Atheist cannot read and is forced to concede.


jread
SuperfanTheist
jread's picture
Posts: 353
Joined: 2007-05-17
User is offlineOffline
         I thought

         I thought your questions were definitely some of the "hot" ones often getting thrown around. I also liked your answers, very brief and to the point. I thought you did a nice job Loc.

The implication that we should put Darwinism on trial overlooks the fact that Darwinism has always been on trial within the scientific community. -- From Finding Darwin's God by Kenneth R. Miller

Chaos and chance don't mean the absence of law and order, but rather the presence of order so complex that it lies beyond our abilities to grasp and describe it. -- From From Certainty to Uncertainty by F. David Peat


Waiting for Oblivion
Waiting for Oblivion's picture
Posts: 229
Joined: 2007-10-22
User is offlineOffline
Very good and informing, I

Very good and informing, I like it.


BMcD
Posts: 777
Joined: 2006-12-20
User is offlineOffline
Loc wrote:“I cannot

Loc wrote:

“I cannot imagine a God who rewards and punishes the objects of his creation, whose purposes are modeled after our own- a God, in short, who is but a reflection of human fragility. Neither can I believe that an individual survives the death of his body, although feeble souls harbor such thoughts through fear or ridiculous egotisms.”- 19 April 1995, Breaking the Last Taboo

I wasn't aware Uncle Al lived that long. Eye-wink

"You've got to remember that these are just simple farmers. These are people of the land. The common clay of the new West. You know... morons." - The Waco Kid


Loc
Superfan
Loc's picture
Posts: 1130
Joined: 2007-11-06
User is offlineOffline
BMcD wrote:Loc

BMcD wrote:

Loc wrote:

“I cannot imagine a God who rewards and punishes the objects of his creation, whose purposes are modeled after our own- a God, in short, who is but a reflection of human fragility. Neither can I believe that an individual survives the death of his body, although feeble souls harbor such thoughts through fear or ridiculous egotisms.”- 19 April 1995, Breaking the Last Taboo

I wasn't aware Uncle Al lived that long. Eye-wink

oops.Should be 1955 me thinks. Sigh I can't edit the orginal post. Let's hope xtains aren't as sharp eyed

Psalm 14:1 "the fool hath said in his heart there is a God"-From a 1763 misprinted edition of the bible

dudeofthemoment wrote:
This is getting redudnant. My patience with the unteachable[atheists] is limited.

Argument from Sadism: Theist presents argument in a wall of text with no punctuation and wrong spelling. Atheist cannot read and is forced to concede.


Jella
Jella's picture
Posts: 5
Joined: 2007-01-03
User is offlineOffline
Bravo!

on a fine job.

Thanks for taking the time.


latincanuck
atheist
latincanuck's picture
Posts: 2036
Joined: 2007-06-01
User is offlineOffline
Great points

However, like most theists that stick to these points they will ignore the answer and continue in their ignorance, I always get the hitler/stalin/mao/pot pol statement, and even AFTER correcting them many many many many many many times over, they still use it (the ones that I know). It seems they cannot understand that communism has more in common with religion than atheism, yes many of the leaders shun religion per se, the reason being that the church/religion is an obstacle to its power, in order to keep the people happy they have to share the power with the church, and most communists regimes are against sharing power with anyone else other than themselves.

 

Of course the atheism is a religion is the other most common one I get, because you know darwin is our god and we worship evolution and all, yet the other most ignorant statement they make. Darwin is no god, just a dead scientist that put forth his hypothesis of evolution which later became scientific theory after OTHER scientists were able to prove the hypothesis correct, well parts of it, many other parts have been added and or changed as our understanding of evolution has increased. But hey, we worship evolution PRAISE BE DARWIN!! MAY YOU EVOLVE my brothers and sisters......bunch of wankers is what they are.


bidicarlitoswway
Posts: 1
Joined: 2008-02-20
User is offlineOffline
Good job

Good job, these are the arguments I read ALL the time, the most common ones... There are ways to dismantle the Anthropic principle very effectively and the Stalin Hitler, especially Stalin... All your responses would have been what I would have responded to these!

 

NICE AND SIMPLE!! GOOD JOB!!


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
I inserted a mod edit with

I inserted a mod edit with the correct citation for the Einstein quote, and an explanation of the incorrect date.

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


Loc
Superfan
Loc's picture
Posts: 1130
Joined: 2007-11-06
User is offlineOffline
Thanks Hamby.You're the best

Thanks Hamby.You're the best kitty mod ever

Another one I just remembered about:

 

16.Second Law of Thermodynamics

    Premises: ‘The second law of thermodynamics is an expression of the universal law of increasing entropy, stating that the entropy of an isolated system which is not in equilibrium  will tend to increase over time, approaching a maximum value at equilibrium.’ This is said to disprove evolution, because life can only move towards a state of disorder, not evolve to be more orderly as seen in evolution. A car left for a decade will turn to rust, not a better car.The only possible answer is a creator.

Problem: This law only applies in a closed system, which neither our solar system nor the universe is. This argument would be perfectly true is there wasn’t a massive source of energy near the earth, like say, the sun. Furthermore, by Christian reasoning no one could even grow or live very long, since everything heads towards entropy. Babies would die soon after birth, since the universe moves only towards chaos, disorder, and death right?

Also, stop using inorganic man-made objects in evolution examples. It’s just stupid. For some reason I’ve heard christians use car examples more than once.

 

Psalm 14:1 "the fool hath said in his heart there is a God"-From a 1763 misprinted edition of the bible

dudeofthemoment wrote:
This is getting redudnant. My patience with the unteachable[atheists] is limited.

Argument from Sadism: Theist presents argument in a wall of text with no punctuation and wrong spelling. Atheist cannot read and is forced to concede.


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
Have you read Dawkins 747

Have you read Dawkins 747 explanation?  I think it's in the God Delusion.  In his incredibly articulate and easy to understand way, he pretty much demolishes cars, planes, and stopwatches as proof of anything other than human ingenuity.

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


I AM GOD AS YOU
Superfan
Posts: 4793
Joined: 2007-09-29
User is offlineOffline
Good Job OP , etc .... more

Good job OP ,  .... more of the same here ,  in Google,

"Top ten arguments for the existence of God"   ..... not the first one .... as now ....

Seems I cant paste a working link ????   last try , ( just google the title )

http://freethoughtpedia.com/wiki/Top_ten_arguments_for_the_existence_of_God

     yup , PC is freaking  ? ummm, god hates me ..... must be my family tree , I need a priest .....   (silly religion)  

     [ link fixed ]

 

 

 

 

 


latincanuck
atheist
latincanuck's picture
Posts: 2036
Joined: 2007-06-01
User is offlineOffline
Irreducible complexity

#17 Irreducible Complexity Argument: Another favorite as of late from the ID camp, of course this has been refuted many times, by so many others from the scientific community and it has been shown to be completely without merit that Behe has become the laughing stock of the scientific and theistic community.....pretty much on par with Kent Hovid,


Loc
Superfan
Loc's picture
Posts: 1130
Joined: 2007-11-06
User is offlineOffline
Hambydammit wrote:Have you

Hambydammit wrote:

Have you read Dawkins 747 explanation?  I think it's in the God Delusion.  In his incredibly articulate and easy to understand way, he pretty much demolishes cars, planes, and stopwatches as proof of anything other than human ingenuity.

 

Yes I have. I particularly enjoyed it becasue in my school science books they taught the Boeing 747 argument as proof against evolution.The first time I read Dawkin's explanation I felt pretty silly that I'd ever bought it as a serious argument. I feel like re-reading that part of TGD now...

Psalm 14:1 "the fool hath said in his heart there is a God"-From a 1763 misprinted edition of the bible

dudeofthemoment wrote:
This is getting redudnant. My patience with the unteachable[atheists] is limited.

Argument from Sadism: Theist presents argument in a wall of text with no punctuation and wrong spelling. Atheist cannot read and is forced to concede.


Louis_Cypher
BloggerSuperfan
Louis_Cypher's picture
Posts: 529
Joined: 2008-03-22
User is offlineOffline
Good job indeed....

Ok...one little tiny flaw....

Problem: There are several flaws here. Firstly, not many atheists will claim to know beyond a doubt there is no god. It is impossible to prove a negative. They have no belief in one.

A good friend of mine on another forum (Paltalk, to be exact) took me to task for this same statement. It is not, in fact, imposible to prove a negative. It is problematic to prove a UNIVERSAL negative OR a universal positive assertion.

Example: There is NO 15 ft Aligator in my bathtub.

This is true, and quite easily provable.

(It ticked me off to no end to have one of my long held truisms dashed on the rocks of relentless logic, but what the heck, I had a cup of Green tea and got over it.)

 

LC >;-}>

 

Christianity: A disgusting middle eastern blood cult, based in human sacrifice, with sacraments of cannibalism and vampirism, whose highest icon is of a near naked man hanging in torment from a device of torture.


Loc
Superfan
Loc's picture
Posts: 1130
Joined: 2007-11-06
User is offlineOffline
That's true, perhaps I

That's true, perhaps I should have said universal negative. However, I'm sure you shall get the gist of my meaning, in that contary to what christians seem to think, we aren't saying we know there isn't a god.Rather, we do not believe in one. Also, the burden of proof is still with them.

Maybe I'll have a cup of Earl Gray and get over it

Psalm 14:1 "the fool hath said in his heart there is a God"-From a 1763 misprinted edition of the bible

dudeofthemoment wrote:
This is getting redudnant. My patience with the unteachable[atheists] is limited.

Argument from Sadism: Theist presents argument in a wall of text with no punctuation and wrong spelling. Atheist cannot read and is forced to concede.


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
The "proving a negative"

The "proving a negative" problem is a lot like the "Second Law of Thermodynamics" problem.  Of course, neither is really a problem, but rather a misunderstanding.

The SLoT says that in a closed system things tend towards entropy, and therefore cannot be applied to life on earth.  Similarly, a negative can only be proven within a universe of discourse, or again, a closed system.

If I tell you that the parameters for this question are a box containing a comb, a penny, and a thumbtack, and then I ask you which item I'm thinking of, you can glean the correct answer by elimination.  If you ask if I'm thinking of the comb and penny, and I say, "No" to each of them, you can prove that -- provided the answers were true -- within this universe of discourse, I was thinking of the thumbtack.*

This is an example of using negation to prove a positive -- something the "supernatural" argument cannot do.

Similarly, if I tell you that I am, at this very moment, standing directly in front of you, all you have to do is wave your hand around and ascertain that there are air molecules directly in front of you.  Since two things cannot occupy the same space at the same time, and I am not air molecules, I cannot be there.  You have proven that I am not standing directly in front of you.

Granted, these proofs are less than philosophical or mathematical coups, but they illustrate how in daily life we prove negatives and use negatives to prove positives.

 

*A very clever person would think to ask me if I was thinking of the box -- just to eliminate all possibilities without assuming that the box was just a carrier.

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


HeyZeusCreaseToe
Superfan
HeyZeusCreaseToe's picture
Posts: 675
Joined: 2008-02-27
User is offlineOffline
Good Job

Me rike ris a rot.  This is a nice format of complex arguments made easy.


I AM GOD AS YOU
Superfan
Posts: 4793
Joined: 2007-09-29
User is offlineOffline
I AM GOD AS YOU ......

 I AM GOD AS YOU ......  simple / complex    

I AM a terrorist, I AM a lover .....  ????????? 


General-Forrest
General-Forrest's picture
Posts: 87
Joined: 2008-05-29
User is offlineOffline
by chance is this the ten you wanted

here is a link i found i know its not main website but it looked like it sorced it but i am not sure.

http://bsalert.com/news/2195/Top_10_Arguments_For_The_Existence_Of_God.html

i always like the arguement from people that believe something and want to tell you. then they get mad when you start to question them about why you should believe. the best one i heard was science has no purpose on life. yea thats a lie and anyone that can think knows science has done a lot of things to help understand and help out with life.

i was just trying to get you a working link. i hope it helps out.


Loc
Superfan
Loc's picture
Posts: 1130
Joined: 2007-11-06
User is offlineOffline
18. AgnosticismNot a

18. Agnosticism
Not a Christian argument, but something that’s been seen a lot lately.


Premises: Agnosticism is a safer bet than atheism. It is a middle ground between theism and atheism. It refers to someone who isn’t sure about god.


Problem: Gnosticism and agnosticism refer to knowledge, theism and atheism to faith.

To put things very barely, you believe or you don't. You cannot both have and not have faith. Therefore, you are theist or atheist. A lot of people don't like to think like that. They prefer to say 'I'm not sure, maybe there's something out there' But if you are not a believer, you are by default a non believer.

People think atheism implies an active disbelief in gods. However, this is covered by weak and strong atheism. Strong atheism is reserved for such 'militant' non believers.

In truth, both the doubter and definite unbeliever are atheists. Many atheists call themselves agnostic atheists, as they have neither knowledge nor faith of god.
It is even possible to be an agnostic theist, as some theists will say there is no way for us to know anything about god. So as you can see, agnosticism is a state of un-belief. It is not a weaker state than atheism, as each deals with a different meaning. If you are agnostic you might as well call yourself atheist.
 

Psalm 14:1 "the fool hath said in his heart there is a God"-From a 1763 misprinted edition of the bible

dudeofthemoment wrote:
This is getting redudnant. My patience with the unteachable[atheists] is limited.

Argument from Sadism: Theist presents argument in a wall of text with no punctuation and wrong spelling. Atheist cannot read and is forced to concede.


Loc
Superfan
Loc's picture
Posts: 1130
Joined: 2007-11-06
User is offlineOffline
19.Argument from Irreducible

19.Argument from Irreducible Complexity.

Premises: ‘’Irreducible complexity (IC) is an argument made by proponents of intelligent design that certain biological systems are too complex to have evolved from simpler, or "less complete" predecessors, through natural selection acting upon a series of advantageous naturally occurring chance mutations’’

Also put forward in the format of a mouse trap, like the eye, cannot function if one piece is removed. Therefore, the eye could not have evolved, or, what good is half a wing/eye?

Problem: This argument has been extremely well answered in The God Delusion. What theists seem to forget is that we see examples of the eye and other ‘irreducible complex’ organs in nature, in a less complex form.

Not all creatures have eyes as good as humans. They still survive. Simply being able to make out the direction of light or vague shapes is already an advantage in staying alive over complete blindness. Likewise, many creatures have better eyesight than humans. This means there are creatures more complex than us,which does not fit a creationist ‘made in god’s image’ view. An eagle might be appalled by our eyesight, and moved to conclude only it’s eye was designed, as it is superior.

In the mousetrap example, the problem is a mousetrap does still work if you remove a piece.Just not as intended. You could still bludgeon the mouse to death with it. Similarly, eyes missing a piece might still function, just not as we are used to. As said before, any kind of sight is advantageous. There is no reason to think human’s level of sight is the necessary norm for survival. Earthworms and moles have little to no sight, but survive.

Let’s think about wings. Half a wing isn’t going to get you far right? A creature evolving half a wing is sure to get eaten. But we see many ‘half wings’ in nature. Gliding squirrels don’t have proper wings, but rather parachute like flaps of skin. These enable them to glide from tree to tree. Not a proper wing, but at 100 feet this ‘half wing’ means the difference between life and death.

The common mistake here is the assumption that evolution works towards a goal, which it does not. The eye as we know it is a transitional form, like everything else.

There are, after all, cave crabs with eye stalks and no eyes. Doesn’t say intelligent design to me

Psalm 14:1 "the fool hath said in his heart there is a God"-From a 1763 misprinted edition of the bible

dudeofthemoment wrote:
This is getting redudnant. My patience with the unteachable[atheists] is limited.

Argument from Sadism: Theist presents argument in a wall of text with no punctuation and wrong spelling. Atheist cannot read and is forced to concede.