My ongoing discussion with a "Christian Apologetic"

My mission takes me to all kinds of weird and wonderful places, such as the blog for the "Christian Apologetics Society". They have a post related to my Thought Experiment for Fundamentalist Christians which can be found at: http://christian-apologetics-society.blogspot.com/2009/02/atheist-thought-experiment.html

This is our most recent exchange and my new comments are in italics:

Welcome back, Atheist Missionary!

AM: "Thank-you for point out the flaws in my argument."

You're welcome. Hopefully, you will take our comments as constructive criticism. If you are planning to continue engaging in "atheist apologetics" with Christians, I would encourage you to become familiar with fallacies. Also, you would likely find a short course or tutorial in logic to be helpful. Personally, I enjoy these exchanges as the improve my debate, logic and philosophy skills as well. Mmmm... Mind candy.

My aim is to convince you of the utter irrationality of your beliefs. To be frank, I do not really consider it much of a "debate" for reasons which I will elaborate on below.

AM: "I can no more disprove the existence of your God than you can disprove the existence of a celestial teapot orbiting the earth. My point is that the similarity between these two propositions is that they are equally implausible."

You've just created trouble for yourself by making the positive claim that "they are equally implausible". Any time one makes a positive claim, the burden of proof rests with the person making the positive claim. Again, you have made a positive claim and offered no proof of said claim.

My bad. You are correct. The orbiting teapot is far more plausible.

AM: "I think it is a crying shame that you are wasting your intellectual energy on a myth.

Again, two more positive claims without proof: "...you are wasting your intellectual energy..." and "a myth".

A myth is defined as a traditional, typically ancient story dealing with supernatural beings, ancestors, or heroes that serves as a fundamental type in the worldview of a people, as by explaining aspects of the natural world or delineating the psychology, customs, or ideals of society. With respect, I cannot conceive of a better definition for Christianity.

AM: "After all, you are an atheist with respect to Thor and Zeus and the thousands of other Gods aside from your Yahweh."

There seems to be several assumptions on your part. Perhaps I recognize Zeus as being one and the same meta-physical being that Christians call "God the Father"? I hardly think I would then be an atheist with respect to Zeus. Ditto for Thor and several other names given by early men with an imperfect knowledge of God. Your implied claim that I too am an atheist seems to fall short.

I think I can safely assume that you are an atheist with respect to polytheistic belief systems. As far as the early men who who feel had an "imperfect knowledge of God", am I correct in assuming that you rely solely on the collection of ancient scripts that made their way into what we now refer to as the modern Bible to confirm that your view is superior to all of the other organized religions that hold views contrary to your own? If so, see the comments below concerning the "Good Book".

AM: "Whenever I come across a site like yours, I can't hesitate but wonder how you grapple with some fairly simple questions."

Well, let's find out, shall we?

Let's rock and roll.

AM: "Why do you put so much faith in a book when there are countless other holy books?"

I, and numerous fellow Christians, have examined the Bible using secular literary technique. We have determined from surviving documents that the Bible of today is a faithful translation of the original scrolls. We have determined from historical evidence that the Bible is remarkably accurate regarding places, names, culture, and events. I have read and examined the Koran, the Book of Mormon, the Tripitaka, and numerous other religious documents (most of which are in my personal library). Each time applying the same secular method of literary cristicism. While I find many truths, I also find much that is not true or contradicts truths in other sources. I find based, not on emotion, but on logic and reason that the Bible alone seems to be exactly what it claims to be. Have you also made this examination of religious texts? If not, why not?

I agree that a review of religious texts is essential to a study of world history and literature. However, I do not compare books which suggest the existence of supernatural entities in order to determine which is the most "accurate". As I have said before and I will say again: all religions can't be right but they certainly can all be wrong. If you are interested to know which belief systems I find the most intriguing, I would probably choose Zen Buddhism (as popularized by Alan Watts). Of course, as you probably know, Zen is not a religion and is more a view of life.

AM: "Aren't you the least bit concerned about all the nastiness in the Bible and the fact that God seems to be a vain, nasty fellow?"

Nope, but then I did read the Bible from cover to cover and discovered that God is not "vain, nasty fellow" that he seems to you.

Well, might I suggest that you surf on over to a site which I commend to all my readers and one which I am sure you are familiar with: God is imaginary - http://godisimaginary.com/ Specifically, I commend you to Proof #5 Read the Bible which provides as follows:

Imagine that we are good friends. One day we are talking:

Me: Wow, you will not believe this new book I've been reading!

You: What's it about?

Me: It is a manual for living a better life. It is also a guide to creating a better society for ourselves and our children. It has changed my life!

You: That sounds like an important book. Who wrote it?

Me: The author is supposed to be the smartest person in the universe.

You: That's amazing -- if the author is the smartest person in the universe, the book must be absolutely brilliant. I can't wait to see it. Do you have a copy with you?

Me: Absolutely! I carry it with me everywhere I go! Here, have a look for yourself... You open the book to a random page, and you find this:

Any of the people of Israel, or of the aliens who reside in Israel, who give any of their offspring to Molech shall be put to death; the people of the land shall stone them to death. I myself will set my face against them, and will cut them off from the people, because they have given of their offspring to Molech, defiling my sanctuary and profaning my holy name. And if the people of the land should ever close their eyes to them, when they give of their offspring to Molech, and do not put them to death, I myself will set my face against them and against their family, and will cut them off from among their people, them and all who follow them in prostituting themselves to Molech.

If any turn to mediums and wizards, prostituting themselves to them, I will set my face against them, and will cut them off from the people. Consecrate yourselves therefore, and be holy; for I am the Lord your God. Keep my statutes, and observe them; I am the Lord; I sanctify you. All who curse father or mother shall be put to death; having cursed father or mother, their blood is upon them.

If a man commits adultery with the wife of his neighbour, both the adulterer and the adulteress shall be put to death. The man who lies with his father’s wife has uncovered his father’s nakedness; both of them shall be put to death; their blood is upon them. If a man lies with his daughter-in-law, both of them shall be put to death; they have committed perversion; their blood is upon them. If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall be put to death; their blood is upon them. [Leviticus, chapter 20]

You are not quite sure what to say. You look at me for a moment.

You: I thought you said that this is written by the most intelligent person in the universe. If we are going to follow what this author says, we have to kill half the people in America. We are supposed to kill everyone who has cursed his father or mother, everyone who has committed adultery, and every homosexual.

Me: Well, that's in the old testament, you see. The book is really two books, and the "old" part of the book doesn't really apply.

You: Are you saying that the smartest person in the universe once wanted us to kill every adulterer and homosexual, but then changed his mind? That somehow makes it better? If the "old part" no longer applies, then why did you hand it to me when I asked to see the book?

Me: Well, parts of it do apply.

You: Didn't you just tell me that it doesn't apply? You open the book to another random page and you find this:

When you buy a male Hebrew slave, he shall serve for six years, but in the seventh he shall go out a free person, without debt. If he comes in single, he shall go out single; if he comes in married, then his wife shall go out with him. If his master gives him a wife and she bears him sons or daughters, the wife and her children shall be her master’s and he shall go out alone. But if the slave declares, ‘I love my master, my wife, and my children; I will not go out a free person’, then his master shall bring him before God. He shall be brought to the door or the doorpost; and his master shall pierce his ear with an awl; and he shall serve him for life.

When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she shall not go out as the male slaves do. If she does not please her master, who designated her for himself, then he shall let her be redeemed; he shall have no right to sell her to a foreign people, since he has dealt unfairly with her. If he designates her for his son, he shall deal with her as with a daughter. If he takes another wife to himself, he shall not diminish the food, clothing, or marital rights of the first wife. And if he does not do these three things for her, she shall go out without debt, without payment of money.

Whoever strikes a person mortally shall be put to death. If it was not premeditated, but came about by an act of God, then I will appoint for you a place to which the killer may flee. But if someone wilfully attacks and kills another by treachery, you shall take the killer from my altar for execution.

Whoever strikes father or mother shall be put to death.

Whoever kidnaps a person, whether that person has been sold or is still held in possession, shall be put to death. Whoever curses father or mother shall be put to death.

When individuals quarrel and one strikes the other with a stone or fist so that the injured party, though not dead, is confined to bed, but recovers and walks around outside with the help of a staff, then the assailant shall be free of liability, except to pay for the loss of time, and to arrange for full recovery.

When a slave-owner strikes a male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies immediately, the owner shall be punished. But if the slave survives for a day or two, there is no punishment; for the slave is the owner’s property. [Exodus, chapter 21] Again, you are dumfounded. Here the author of the book is advocating slavery, the branding of slaves, and the wholesale beating of slaves. You are not quite sure what to say. You look at me for a moment.

You: You have to be kidding me. Here the "smartest person in the universe" is telling us that slavery is OK and that we are free to beat our slaves.

You open the book to another random page and you find this:

I desire, then, that in every place the men should pray, lifting up holy hands without anger or argument; also that the women should dress themselves modestly and decently in suitable clothing, not with their hair braided, or with gold, pearls, or expensive clothes, but with good works, as is proper for women who profess reverence for God. Let a woman learn in silence with full submission. I permit no woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she is to keep silent. For Adam was formed first, then Eve; and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor. Yet she will be saved through childbearing, provided they continue in faith and love and holiness, with modesty. [1 Timothy, chapter 2]

You are nearly speechless. But you manage to find your voice.

You: Is this some kind of joke? "I permit no woman to teach or to have authority over a man." That is totally sexist! In America, there are millions of female teachers and we have women throughout our corporate and govenment hierarchies. No intelligent person believes that women should be silenced. As you page through the book further you find that it is

totally sexist from beginning to end.

You keep opening the book to random pages, and nearly everything you find is utter nonsense. Either it is meaningless, completely irrelevant, disgusting or downright wrong.

If you are a scientist it is even worse, and it starts with the very first line:

In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth... That's not true. In the beginning a natural event created the universe as we know it, and the earth did not form until billions of years later. The creation story in Genesis is completely wrong. Simply read Genesis and you can see it. For example, the Bible says that light and darkness are created after the water but before the sun. Everyone knows that the sun came first, then the planet and its rotation (which is what causes light and darkness to occur on a daily basis) and then the water, and this all happened over million of years. There are many other problems with the Bible:

Man did not come from a handful of dust through some mythological being.

Man evolved from other species like every other living thing has for hundreds of millions of years.

The Bible talks about a world-wide flood that covered earth in 5.5 miles of water and killed everything, yet we know it never happened. That is clear from the archeological record.

There was no tower of Babel where God confounded the languages of mankind. The list goes on and on. The Bible is nonsense in a thousand different scientific ways.

Ask yourself this simple question: Why, when you read the Bible, are you not left in awe? Why doesn't a book written by an omniscient being leave you with a sense of wonder and amazement? If you are reading a book written by the all-powerful, all-knowing, all-loving creator of the universe, wouldn't you expect to be stunned by the brilliance, the clarity and the wisdom of the author? Would you not expect each new page to intoxicate you with its incredible prose and its spectacular insight? Wouldn't you expect the author to tell us things that scientists have not been able to discover yet?

Yet, when we open the Bible and actually read it, we find it is nothing like that at all. Instead of leaving us in awe, it leaves us dumbfounded by all of the nonsense and backwardness that it contains. If you read what the Bible actually says, you find that the Bible is ridiculous. The examples shown above barely scratch the surface of the Bible's numerous problems. If we are honest with ourselves, it is obvious that an "all-knowing" God had absolutely nothing to do with this book.

The reason why the Bible contains so much nonsense is because God is imaginary. The Bible is a book written thousands of years ago by primitive men. A book that advocates senseless murder, slavery and the oppression of women has no place in our society today.

AM: "Don't you wonder why your God allows all the senseless suffering in the world?"

You seem to make the unsupported assumption that "sensless suffering" exists. Just because you may not understand suffering, doesn't make suffering senseless. Many modern Christians also wrestle with suffering as the ancient Christian apologias for suffering has been lost to their particular sect. Suffering has to do with holiness. I recommend you research Catholic and Orthodox documents on suffering.

Stephen Law handles the logical problem of evil (for theists) much better than I could ever hope to: http://stephenlaw.blogspot.com/2008/12/could-it-be-pretty-obvious-theres-no.html

I agree that suffering has plenty to do with holiness. Your God is a masochist.

AM: "Aren't you concerned that the power of prayer is sterile, at least in experimental settings?"

Um, no. BTW, while there may have been some studies where prayer was sterile in experimental settings, are there not also some studies that show prayer as being efficacious?

My friend, please disregard studies where people might have experienced a slightly better recovery rate when told that they were being prayed for. What I am talking about is the absence of even one double-blind study where the power of prayer has been proven to have any effect on anything. If you can show me any recognized experimental study that disproves my bold assertion that prayer is sterile in an experimental setting, please provide it. However, I can save you the time because I know for a fact that no such study exists. By all means, ask The Discovery Institute.

I also strongly recommend proof #48 at: http://godisimaginary.com/i48.htm which aptly compares prayer to a lucky horshoe. The proof concludes with the following observation:

Quite simply, prayer has absolutely no effect on the outcome of any event. The "power of prayer" is actually "the power of coincidence." Belief in prayer is pure superstition.

AM: " Why don't I get to go to heaven if I lead a saintly life but choose not to accept Jesus as my personal saviour or, better yet, have never heard of the Bible?"

Um, who says? That's not my belief, nor the doctrine of my form of Christianity. Invincible ignorance is a valid defense and those individuals who are invincibly ignorant are likely in no danger of not going to heaven. However, you may not qualify under invincible ignorance as it seems from your responses that you are aware of the Bible and have been made aware to the possibility that God exists. That would seem to place you in a different status than someone who has "never heard of the Bible?", does it not? Again, I and others of my ancient Christian faith don't presume to know your eternal fate. We believe your judgement and your eternity is under God's dominion. You are free to acccept or reject those truths you hear from others, like ourself, at your own peril. Are you familiar with Paschal's Wager?

I am aware of the Bible and, as indicated above, I believe it to be a throughly repulsive.

Pascal's wager is the ultimate intellectual cop-out. I am almost certain that there is no celestial teapot orbiting the earth but I cannot absolutely disprove its existence. So, given that there is no downside associated with my believing in the orbiting teapot, I will believe. If this is the best that you can come up with to support your belief in God, your belief is vacuous.

Feel free to drop by anytime and comment. You are always welcome. God bless... +Timothy

The pleasure was all mine.