Feed on Posts or Comments 22 May 2018

Christianity &Islam &Judaism Thomas on 22 Dec 2011 12:38 am

A faulty line of reasoning frequently seen in the Religious

If you look down through the list of comments on this post, you will come to a comment that says:

So when will the atheists and maintainers of this blog be proving God does not exist? I have been visiting time to time for a year, but nothing is ever offered.

The problem is that this logic must apply to all “gods” if it applies to any “god”. E.G.: When will anyone be proving that Zeus does not exist? A few comments down we find this explanation of the faulty logic:

If you are saying that Zeus exists because no-one proved otherwise, then you are saying that all gods exist. Now that’s a remarkably stupid statement and one that would put you at odds with the one-true god line of Christianity.

So, let’s assume you are saying that Zeus does not exist. Fine, you just took the position that Zeus does not exist because no-one proved that he exists. Will you apply that standard to the other 10,000 gods also worshiped by man, or do they exist for you and, again, you’re not a true Christian?

At this point, unless you are being intellectually dishonest, you must take the same position and standard with all gods, including yours. Hence, you must prove your god exists or make it clear that you believe every and any god ever proposed by any man exists. You won’t have proved anything, but you would be consistent.

So, which is it, Ian. Does Zeus exist or not exist and using the same standard, what do you have for your god?

This video demonstrates the mental block that most religious people have on this issue:

35 Responses to “A faulty line of reasoning frequently seen in the Religious”

  1. on 22 Dec 2011 at 3:58 am 1.Anonymous said …

    Oooh, I’ve been quoted three times in a row. Now wasn’t there a myth a few thousand years ago about a magic three-in-one being?

  2. on 22 Dec 2011 at 11:36 am 2.Anonymous said …

    Buddha says http://i.imgur.com/aDR66.jpg

  3. on 22 Dec 2011 at 11:49 pm 3.MegaByte said …

    30 year atheist

    Your post should have been pasted on this thread. This is classic wishy-washiness by atheist. If they have just a simple rejection why do they bother with low-budget radio shows and blogs?

    I reject atheism until proof on their position can be demonstrated.

    There we go, now the ball is in their court.

  4. on 23 Dec 2011 at 1:29 am 4.Hell Yeah said …

    “I reject atheism until proof on their position can be demonstrated.
    There we go, now the ball is in their court.”

    So you reject not believing something is real because of the lack of evidence? With something as important as a god and worshipping this god because of wanting an afterlife, wouldn’t you want evidence, just any kind of real evidence, before you subject your whole lifestyle to blindly believing something of this magnitude? The default position of something being true is to believe it isn’t true until evidence supports it to be true. That is the way it is for everything.

    If you reject atheisem, then which god do you believe in? Why don’t you believe in the other gods? You are rejecting believing in those other gods. What would you tell a person who believes in a different god than you, that your god is the true one and theirs isn’t? What evidence would you give them that yours is real and theirs isn’t? Atheism just rejects all gods until real evidence shows that one of them exists.

    Who knows, maybe there is a god out there that has never shown himself to his creation. That still wouldn’t mean we would get an afterlife. Would you still believe/worship your god if there wasn’t an afterlife promised? An afterlife was invented by humans because they were and some still are afraid of dying. It is just a way to cope. Wishing it were true doesn’t make it true. I would gladly accept a god and an afterlife if it were real, but since no evidence has come to light, I will not believe until then. I used to believe, but the more I learned about history and science, the more I realized how religion was man made for various possible reasons.

  5. on 23 Dec 2011 at 3:06 am 5.DPK said …

    3.MegaByte said …
    “I reject atheism until proof on their position can be demonstrated.”

    As is your right.
    Please do the rest of humanity a favor though. Don’t breed.

  6. on 23 Dec 2011 at 3:39 am 6.Anonymous said …

    3.MegaByte said …
    “I reject atheism until proof on their position can be demonstrated.”

    You know, I would very much like me one of them there unicorns. Hence, I’m going to reject my disbelieve that there are no Unicorns until someone can prove to me that they definitively don’t exist.

    OK, done, be right back… Nope, still got no Unicorns in the garage. Perhaps I didn’t disbelieve hard enough?

  7. on 23 Dec 2011 at 4:36 am 7.Curmudgeon said …

    “With something as important as a god and worshipping this god because of wanting an afterlife, wouldn’t you want evidence,”

    I would and I do. The question is not evidence, it is a matter if you accept it. Plenty there for me.

    Megabyte I join you in your rejection. I don’t have that much faith.

    Have a great Christmas.

  8. on 23 Dec 2011 at 1:53 pm 8.Anonymous said …

    I would and I do. The question is not evidence, it is a matter if you accept it. Plenty there for me.

    So, there you go.

    No need to prove that this god exists, nor does it really matter about the evidence. What matters is if you can convince yourself to accept it. An active imagination would clearly be helpful.

    Ergo, gods are imaginary.

    Enjoy your Christmas, and all the other pagan and pre-christian festivals and rituals celebrated around the time of the winter solstice.

    Historically, the date of December 25th wasn’t chosen until the 4th century CE as it was a convenient date to align with existing pagan ceremonies. So much for the extensive written record which didn’t actually contain a birth date for the so-called son of a god.

  9. on 23 Dec 2011 at 2:55 pm 9.Anonymous said …

    Would a theist please take on the question at the end of this blog post?

    We can start with Zeus, but be clear that any answer needs to apply to all gods.

  10. on 23 Dec 2011 at 2:59 pm 10.Hell Yeah said …

    “I would and I do. The question is not evidence, it is a matter if you accept it. Plenty there for me.”

    What is the evidence you speak of then? Instead of just saying there is evidence, give examples. And stories written by people a few thousand years ago don’t count for something that still exists today.

    Happy Winter Solstice!, since that is the real reason we have a big celebration this time of the year before the Christians stole the idea and decided it would be a good time to make it a character named Jesus’s birthday.

  11. on 23 Dec 2011 at 3:16 pm 11.Hell Yeah said …

    Curmudgeon, if you think your evidence is in the bible, then what about all the other books that are the foudation of all the other relgions? Why isn’t their “evidence” in their book count just as much as yours? Or is it that you see their books as fiction books? Why would they write those fiction books then, but your book the bible people wrote it as non-fiction according to you?

  12. on 23 Dec 2011 at 4:22 pm 12.DPK said …

    Curmudgeon makes half a valid point. “The question is not evidence, it is a matter if you accept it.”
    True enough, but the other half is about the stuff you must also choose to ignore, the things that the theists here always disappear when they are brought up… things like god’s obvious immorality in the bible, the FACT that praying has ZERO effect… things like this must also be overlooked.
    Case in point… Curm recently said that if you ask god to reveal himself to you, he will. So I asked. Two days later, still haven’t heard from god. Why is this. Curm’s truth is so evident to him, and he claims validation by majority, but the majority do not accept the evidence for his particular god at all. No problem, we’ll just ignore that too.
    Then there is the special pleading that all theists engage in. They demand their beliefs be held to a different standard of evidence than all other beliefs. If they didn’t they we would have to give equal credence to Islam, Mormonism, Judaism, Hinduism, Zeus-ism, and virtually any other “ism” that anyone claimed to be true. Crum doesn’t believe in Krishna, presumably. Why not? Because he rejects the existence of that god on EXACTLY the same grounds that I reject the existence of HIS god. Because there is no evidence to suggest that Krishna exists. When challenged on this, they just shrug and change the subject to evolution or Socrates or Pascal or something.

    Remember our vocal and obnoxious friend Ian (aka Horattio) who insisted it was our burden to disprove god, not his to prove it? Do you remember I asked him multiple time to simply define some characteristics of his god, for example, did his concept of god consist of a being both omnipotent and omniscient? He refused to answer… and disappeared. Why? Most definitions of god describe him as all powerful and all knowing. But, as we all know, this is a paradox that cannot be. If a being is all knowing, and he knows what will happen, he cannot change it. If he is all powerful and can change events, then he cannot know for certain what will occur. Likewise with the problem of free will. If a god “knows” what I will do tomorrow, then I cannot possibly have free will to decide to do otherwise. God is described as all loving, yet the bible shows him as jealous, viscous, and vengeful. God is described as all good, yet he choose to bring evil into the world and allow it to continue. God is described as but one, yet he is surrounded by angels, saints, and multiple other god-like creatures in a magical kingdom, and he needs these “sub-gods” to do his work. Why? Theists all know this, but what do they do? Shrug and decide to just ignore it.

    So Curmudegeon is right that you must carefully pick and choose what “evidence” to accept and what “evidence” to completely ignore. It’s called being willfully ignorant, and it is an absolute requirement for religious faith.

  13. on 23 Dec 2011 at 8:08 pm 13.A said …

    ‘If they have just a simple rejection why do they bother with low-budget radio shows and blogs?”

    And How! That look like some high school or college radio show. If this is just a simple rejection, why do they have a college radio show? Anyone ever seen the anti-stamp collecting radio call in show?

    They don’t reject the beliefs in God, they are obsessed. Why are they obsessed? Only they can answer that but it reminds of the high school boy who has been rejected by his girl and claims he doesn’t care. Then he can’t eat or sleep because he can’t get his mind off of her.

  14. on 23 Dec 2011 at 8:55 pm 14.DPK said …

    “Anyone ever seen the anti-stamp collecting radio call in show?”

    Anyone ever live in a country where they want to teach stamp collecting as a science in public schools? Anyone ever live in a place where stamp collectors constantly try to influence laws for the betterment of stamp collecting, or where sayings “the stamp collector’s bible” are displayed on government buildings?
    Ever live in a country where people claim the government was founded by stamp collectors, for stamp collectors? Ever live in a country where in some states, if you don’t collect stamps, you are prevented by law from holding public office or even testifying in a court of law?
    Anyone ever live in a world where people fly airplanes into buildings or strap on explosive vests to blow people up because they don’t collect the same kinds of stamps you do? Or where wars are fought over which kind of stamp collector you are?

    13A… your statement is so idiotic it’s not even funny. The reason atheists need a public forum is because of people like YOU who insist on cramming their religion and superstitious nonsense down everyone else s’ throat. So if you want atheists to shut the fuck up and keep their views to themselves, all you have to do is do the same thing!!

  15. on 23 Dec 2011 at 10:07 pm 15.ZZZ said …

    >They don’t reject the beliefs in God,
    >they are obsessed. Why are they obsessed?

    Because of idiocy like that seen in Rick Perry’s bigotry video. He wants to be president so he can make other human beings miserable through his religion. It is disgusting.

    Rick Perry’s bigotry video

  16. on 23 Dec 2011 at 10:41 pm 16.Martin said …

    “Anyone ever live in a country where they want to teach stamp collecting as a science in public schools?”

    I have in the US in Jr High. They taught coin collecting also.

    America has done just fine with Chritians running the nation for over 200 years, well until barrack anyway. I’m just fine with them.

  17. on 23 Dec 2011 at 11:11 pm 17.Hell Yeah said …

    “America has done just fine with Chritians running the nation for over 200 years, well until barrack anyway. I’m just fine with them.”

    Until barrack? Did you forget about George W.? He is the one that drove our economy into the ground. Obama has just been trying to pick up the pieces, the very many pieces that Bush left. It’s amazing how people forget that.

  18. on 24 Dec 2011 at 12:27 am 18.DPK said …

    You mean the George W that took us into a 2.4 TRILLION dollar war looking for non-existent weapons of mass destruction because god told him he should do it??? You mean THAT George W. ???? The one who “speaks to god” everyday?
    I wonder why god didn’t tell him there weren’t any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq? Whoops! So much for being omniscient, huh?

  19. on 24 Dec 2011 at 5:10 am 19.Lou (DFW) said …

    16.Martin said …

    “Anyone ever live in a country where they want to teach stamp collecting as a science in public schools?”

    “I have in the US in Jr High. They taught coin collecting also.”

    As a science? Good job, “Chritians.”

    “America has done just fine with Chritians running the nation for over 200 years, well until barrack anyway. I’m just fine with them.”

    Did those “Chritians” teach spelling? Or do you blame your illiteracy on “barrack?”

  20. on 24 Dec 2011 at 5:27 am 20.Lou (DFW) said …

    3.MegaByte said …

    “I reject atheism until proof on their position can be demonstrated.”

    Megabit is rejecting the rejection of his position. Now, somebody please provide some proof that his position has been rejected.

    Enough said.

    (And we wonder why people believe in imaginary gods.)

  21. on 24 Dec 2011 at 6:34 am 21.Severin said …

    14 DPK

    Well said, thank you.

  22. on 24 Dec 2011 at 3:12 pm 22.Boz said …

    Do we live in a world where people are murdered because they collect stamps and the oppositional government led by non-stamp collectors decides to make it illegal?

    Do we live in a world where non-stamp collectors are credited for killing close to 1 billion stamp collectors because they collect stamps? Do we live in a world where non-stamp collectors wishes to rewrite history and claim stamp collecting was not involved in the founders decision making processes? Do we live in a world where non-stamp collectors regularly write books claiming stamp collecting is a delusional and start amateur radio programs discussing the evils of collecting stamps.

    Do we live in a world where non-stamp collectors rent billboards claiming stamps do not exist? That is my favorite.

    Thanks to A for spurring on this hilariously funny simile atheists still hang on to. Nobody buys it because the action and rhetoric prove otherwise.

    Merry Christmas even to the non-stamp collectors.

  23. on 24 Dec 2011 at 3:59 pm 23.Lou (DFW) said …

    22.Boz said …

    Oh look, after nine days Bozo is finally out of hiding after foolishly claiming that nobody answered Hor’s condition to prove god, hoping that nobody remembers his stupidity.

    And yet he didn’t learn his lesson, again posting an equally stupid comment.

  24. on 24 Dec 2011 at 7:46 pm 24.Anonymous said …

    So, we’re back with the Christians doing everything they can to avoid answering questions related to their god or their belief. Why is that? Why don’t you guys shut up the non-believers with consistent argument rather than belligerence? Well, the answer is somewhat obvious. Having nothing of substance, you need to go on the attack. Right?

    So, let’s try this one. Earlier GW Bush was mentioned so let’s get some answers.

    Bush (or any US president) has control of the most devastating killing power even known on this planet. But what do we make of his claim (note, his claim, not him) to talk to god every day? In the end, there were simply no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, yet this is a man who claims the guidance of a god. So, is it:

    (a) Bush does speak to god, but this god’s instructions result in war and destruction. Absolute morality can then not come from god and this god inflicts pain and suffering on his followers.

    (b) Bush speaks to god but simply lies about what has been said. In that case, why would this god stand around and idly let thousands of people die and see trillions of dollars spent in this name? This is not a loving god and if this god does not intercede in this reality, there is no point in worshiping him. Also, this would not be the god of the bible.

    (c) Bush doesn’t speak to god but this god exists and simply ignores the consequences of actions taken in his name. Same as (b)

    (d) Bush doesn’t speak to god or he thinks he does but this god doesn’t exist because his god is imaginary hence there is no intercession in the real world.

    In the end (d) closely matches what we see in reality.

    Theists, tell us, what are you answers and why?

  25. on 24 Dec 2011 at 10:07 pm 25.Ben said …

    “Do we live in a world where non-stamp collectors rent billboards claiming stamps do not exist? That is my favorite.”

    Boz you are delusional. Those are not stamps, they are only stickers. You believe they are stamps because your mom/dad told you to believe that. Be reasonable.



  26. on 24 Dec 2011 at 10:55 pm 26.Anonymous said …

    Stamps exist, gods don’t. Your analogy is as desperate as it is flawed.

    Tell you what, provide proof of the existence of your god. But you won’t, whim you, and because of these claims of something existing that people make excuses for to explain its absence, that’s where the delusional statements come from.

    You can stop those statements, you can stop those billboard, you can stop these arguments. All you need do is to get your god to put in an appearance just like it says he does in your book of 2000 year-old stories.

  27. on 26 Dec 2011 at 2:20 pm 27.Anonymous said …

    I see 24 is still not answered, yet 3 of the 4 options allowed for the Christian god to exist. Is the problem that none of the possible answers allows for the god of the Bible to exist as described in Christian mythology?

  28. on 02 Jan 2012 at 8:55 am 28.Anonymous said …

    Faith vs evidence


  29. on 03 Jan 2012 at 11:49 am 29.elaine said …

    In the beginning man made god. Those who say they believe in a god believe in a god in their minds. I have no god in my mind. If there could be a god he,or she,or it, must be so cruel and sadistic to let 20 millions children die a week . When god shows themselves to me then I may believe in god or gods, but up till now nothing has been brave enough to face the consquences of the deaths of millions.
    Glad I do not believe in their god, or gods. I am GOOD WITHOUT A GOD.

  30. on 03 Jan 2012 at 12:09 pm 30.Anonymous said …

    Elaine, exactly.

    In order to maintain their delusion of a loving god, believers need to claim that the rare good event (someone surviving a crash) is proof of their god’s love, and all the bad things are either beyond our comprehension or caused by man’s moral decline.

    It’s all nonsense, of course. Morals exist without a 2000 year old book that condones slavery, rape, violence, genocide and hate. In the end stuff happens; none of which has anything to do with gods.

  31. on 07 Jan 2012 at 4:12 am 31.alex said …

    the little kid profesess his belief in Santa Clause and refuses the evil atheist attempt to convince otherwise. “show me the proof that Santa doesn’t exist, otherwise leave me alone!”. delusional dave proclaims himself a “born-again christian” and challenges the stinkin atheist to prove that christ doesn’t exist. ha! no proof, dave smiles. ben ali is a muslim and of course the infidel atheist cannot prove the non-existent allah. the atheist is further discouraged when he realized that he cannot disprove the existence of all the Roman gods, or the the mighty god RA. the atheist is WRONG! religion wins. santa, christ, blah!, blah!, god1, god2, god3, and RA all exists. religion 1 atheist 0. game over.

  32. on 01 Feb 2012 at 1:37 pm 32.Beyond ALL Religions said …

    Religion poisons possible True loves from Marrying

    When I was going to University of California, Berkeley, I was seated on a long table in the University Library with students like myself on either side.

    I was a little tired in the library, and put my head down on my book to rest. When I raised my head up, an attractive dark-haired girl seated across from me was looking at me, smiling, asked “Do you study by osmosis?” (Some people say one can absorb a book by resting their heads upon a book!).

    Amused, I started a conversation with her. Her name was Barbara.

    Later, we spent a lot of time together. I had a car and my own apartment. She lived in San Leandro, about 25 minutes south of Berkeley.

    One time we stayed up all night to see the sunrise. We never consummated our relationship, but came close. She had incredibly soft skin, especially in the neck and shoulder area. She was very intelligent, and we coincided in liberal thinking, in a time of social germinating upheaval. It was 1958. We attended a meeting against the hydrogen bomb, among others.

    I eventually asked her to marry me.

    First, she wanted to meet my family. Both of my parents had died, but I had brothers in Northern California. We went and visited (briefly) my brother Bob and his wife Mary in San Francisco, and my brother Tom and his wife Shirley in Santa Cruz, and my sister Kay, in Santa Clara County, as I recall.

    I believe Barbara truly loved me, but there was an obstacle to our being married, other than her family being wealthier than my family.

    Barbara’s father owned a factory in San Leandro. There was something else. She was Jewish. My remaining family at the time were all Christians. As it turned out, her very rich grandfather did not want her to marry a gentile, and if she did, she was told that he would dis-inherit/disown her. She would be an outcast to an important part of her family.

    I seemed to get along very well with Barbara’s mother, and didn’t see much of her father.

    So because of religion, two people in love, couldn’t marry.

    The irony of the story is that I found out later that my grandparents on my father side are both buried in a Jewish Cemetery in New York. My mother was full blooded Norwegian. Her mother was a lady in waiting to the Queen of Norway. My mother’s father was a Lutheran minister.

    My mother, I heard, told my Jewish father that she would marry him only if he agreed to bring up the children as Christians.

    My father agreed, and his Jewish background was suppressed.

    My mother, Catherine Dahl Butler, eventually had 6 children, me being the last. I didn’t know I was part Jewish until I was 18.

    Later, doing genealogy, I found out that I am probably close to 50% Jewish!

    Maybe her grandfather wouldn’t have dis-inherited her if he was informed of that information.

    If I had known of my Jewish background at the time that I asked Barbara to marry me, would Barbara’s grandfather have approved ? This will always be a mystery.

    I do know religion kills and/or poisons potential marriages between otherwise compatible lovers.

    I later married Marcy, the mother of my son Matthew. Marcy was brought up Catholic, but she was not devout. We needed a facility in which to get married, but we were forbidden to marry in the Catholic Church, because she had a previous divorce. We were married by a Justice of the Peace in San Francisco City Hall instead.

    In a perfect world Beyond Religion, many potential marriages between very otherwise compatible potential partners wouldn’t be arbitrarily blocked. In many religions, to marry a person of a different religion means being ostracized from your church/temple and even family. It means death in certain parts of the Middle East.

    Does this odyssey matter to me, today?

    I am now happily married after several attempts at a lasting married relationship. Besides that, Barbara’s family (grandfather?) would probably have tried to make me convert to Judiasm, and I would be a captive INSIDE religion, not FREE and BEYOND ALL RELIGION.

  33. on 02 Apr 2012 at 6:57 pm 33.MattD said …

    alex…If you are having issues speaking coherently on the internet (with spell and grammar checkers besides!) then your confusion is visible for all to see, which is nice, but I feel sorry for someone to dumb to even make sense enough for children to understand.

  34. on 02 Apr 2012 at 8:06 pm 34.DPK said …

    Hey Matt, before you criticize someone for “issues speaking coherently” maybe you should look up “run-on sentences” and research to proper use of “to and too”.
    Oh, and your proof for the existence of god is……?

  35. on 02 Apr 2012 at 10:13 pm 35.alex said …

    to dumb? you spell like a moron and you believe in god and you calling me dumb? you wishing for virgins when you die and you calling me dumb? you and your kind molest kids, repress women, beat up fags, etc., etc., and you call me dumb. you go on and on defending your impohtent god and you call me dumb. you believe in creationism and you call me dumb?

    asshole. where is your god? dumbass.

    let me see, i became an atheist before i was ten. how old are you mattD? I bet you’re close to death and you’re just hedging? you better hedge on ALL gods. problem is your god doesn’t tolerate other gods. quite a pickle eh, dipshit?

Trackback This Post | Subscribe to the comments through RSS Feed

Leave a Reply