Tuesday, April 5, 2016

The Brilliant way atheists respond to a valid challenge


I wrote an essay on Metacrock's blog responding to a thing Loftus linked to on Dangerous idea. Iput this message on his blog Debunking Christianity:
  • http://debunkingchristianity.blogspot.com/2016/03/methodological-naturalism-again.html 


      Why not just provide evidence showing that your hypotheses about what your version of a god has done are true? Such evidence should unequivocally show it to be your god and not someone elses. If your god is real you should simply demonstrate it in the in the same way that the same way that quantum mechanics has been demonstrated rather than your default approach of always trying to muddy the waters with stupid arguments against naturalism or against evolution.
    Could he demonstrate any more clearly that he doesn't understand the concept? I say all of these ideas of God are pointing to a reality that stands behind them all he says "why don't you just proves it's your God." Duh. Notice he says what "you God has done" not what he is. So that implies he is still thinking in terms of inerrant narrative in some Holy Book.

    I noticed the tag line on your blog is "Have theology, will argue." That's so appropriate given that neither you or anyone else can bring real knowledge and understanding to the notion of a god. The Hindus have theology, will argue. The Pastafarians have theology, will argue. The Buddhists have theology, will argue. The Scientologists have theology, will argue. Your tag line is your admission that you bring nothing to the table that distinguishes you from Thor or Loki or John Frum or Kitchen God or me, Your Lord Russ, who created the universe and made you in my own image. Your tag line is your admission that you have bullshit which is exactly equivalent to all the other religious bullshit which has ever been excreted from the minds of believers of any ilk.
    It's an allusion to tv show "have gun, will travel" (Richard Boone as Paladin) when I was a little kid. Knowledge is knowing stuff. I we know about the Legion of Su[per Heroes we have knowledge. So anything can be knowledge. But the kind of higher level knowledge about God is available only though direct experience of God, which we can have. hat doesn't mean there can't be things to argue about. That includes pompous atheist bull shit.
    If your dumb ass notion of a god is a fact, then demonstrate it. Prove that your stupid god is anything other than your personal wishful thinking all rolled up with the social expectation biases of your preferred Christian religious social club.
    Read my arguments stupid.
     Why should anyone bother to read your silly essay when it will no doubt be the same centuries old mishmash of arguments from ignorance with lots of propped up and beaten dead horse thrown in?
    Holy poisoning the well Batman. This is why these idiot Dawkies can't reason because they don't even consider the evidence, How stupid can you get? They really have to do it that way because they out argue us on the God arguments and they know it.
    It should not be lost on even you that the only truly persuasive "argument" for believing in a god is "We are going to kill you and your whole family if you don't believe in the god we like." When it can be enforced it really works. Think Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia. Think Medieval Europe. But, in those times and places where people have freedom of thought and freedom to access good information, they see just how sad and silly religious belief really is. In the US and Europe, for instance, a great many active Christian churchgoers are atheists. They like hanging out, potlucks, and camp experiences, but their belief in the bullshit has been jettisoned.
    Did he actually say anything of any substance there?
    But, if you really had something true, by the definition of true, it would mean you would be able to demonstrate it, and you would not need to admit how weak and feeble your religious ideas are by announcing, "Have theology, will ARGUE."
    I can demonstrate it dumbass but you to read the argument to get it. No one can beat an opponent who won't deal with the evidence.


      No comments: