A challenge: debate the issue of religion with yours truly

Post Reply New Topic

You misunderstand atheists, it's not that we have positive arguments that theism is wrong, and atheism right. We instead point out that there is no affirmative argument for the theistic worldview, and that an atheistic worldview explains the universe we observe while making the fewest non-provable assumptions. The burden of proof, therefore, is on the theist to convince me that there is valid evidentiary reason to change my mind. Since theists have trouble providing tangible evidence of their gods, the argument usually becomes instead a critique of science, logic, and reason. Evolution, or more precisely the separate scientific theories of common descent, natural selection, and abiogenesis, is ground zero for this critique.
This is a difficult argument for a modern theist to make, because, whether she likes it or not, modern society still places emphasis on logic and reason over received wisdom. (I'm comparing her to a premodern, ie medieval theist). If a theist must argue that logic, reason, and science fail to explain, say, biological diversity, that same indictment should also be leveled at scientific explanations of disease. Theists, in my experience, don't have much issue with the Germ Theory of disease. But it is intellectually dishonest, in my opinion, to select when you support the conclusions of science, and when you do not.
Ultimately, it cannot be known if scientific thinking turns out to be the best mode of inquiry. But at this point in time, it's very difficult to argue against the fruits science has provided over the last two centuries. Yet this is the position the theist frequently finds herself in.

To illustrate, this:
http://www.dustinland.com/archives/archives537.html

There are thousands of gods with different names, different attributes and cults and histories out there. How do you know that yours is the best? Why do you argue that the others don't exist?

Exceptional comment!! !! !! !!
10/10

Okay.
Respond to Epicurus who asked the following:


Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?

Then he is not omnipotent.


Is he is able but not willing?

Then he is malevolent.


Is he both able and willing?

Then whense cometh evil?


Is he is niether willing nor evil?

Then why call him "God"?

I'm surprised the thread died.......oh well.

Are we subject to falling out of existence into the quantum foam?