I notice that at least two people are using something like this as a signature:
If someone lived a trillion X longer than you, and had a billion X more reasoning ability would he come to the same conclusions as you?
When in hell was that a decent reasoned argument? I think being able to PROVE god exists would come before smart comments based upon the assumption of existence.
For all the argumentation, the theists have yet to prove god exists. So effectively the above quotation says ‘Our theoretical god must be way smarter than us, so let’s just do what he says and forget about thinking for ourselves’.
Yes indeed, god is a theory.
Quite a cool one; if you don’t understand something (lightning, death, etc.), then the gods provide an ‘explanation’ for it; lightning is gods fighting, death is not really death, etc.
But it is still a theory. Whenever theists discuss evolution they tend to throw the word ‘theory’ around like it is the ultimate rejoinder. But do they honestly pause and consider that the theory of god is less well supported (as far as actual material evidence goes) than the theory of evolution?
But what about the good old common sense aspect? The creator of the Universe first of all doesn’t provide incontrovertible evidence of its existence. Yeah, I know the arguments theists come up with to explain this, but they are rubbish. Especially the one about god not proving he exists so we can use faith and exercise freewill. Then, as if ‘hiding’ his existence isn’t enough, we are told effectively ‘father knows best’. Yes indeed, god needn’t explain itself and can do anything it likes, and all you have to do to justify it is say ‘he’s bigger and cleverer than us’.
A good teacher can help students come to an understanding. Ever been to a physics class where the lecturer sits on the table and says “This shit is WAY too complicated for you guys, m’kay? Basically the sun is big hot fire in sky makes flowers grow, m’kay?” A good parent doesn’t make rules without trying to provide some justification for them, so as to retain respect. A bad parent says “Don’t ask why, just do”.
A bad teacher blames their students. A bad parent blames their children.
So god is a bad parent and a poor teacher. Add that to the lack of evidence, and, well, you can see why I assert that god is an unproved theory with little evidence and little in the way of logical coherence.
A bit like Santa Claus; no evidence other than the circumstantial stuff (presents), and unauthenticated sightings (grottos), and the math of him delivering all those presents in the time period allowed indicates he would vaporize from atmospheric friction.
Why should I be interested in the alien conspiracy theories of a UFOlogist when they can’t even prove ONE thing? Why should I be interested in the god theories of a theist when they can’t prove ONE thing?
Line your pretty arguments up in a row, they don’t mean a thing unless you can prove god exists.
What? Oh, you mean you can’t? And no one has? What, not ever? Okay. Hold on to those beliefs all you like, I’m glad they give your life some meaning. But they’re not for me.
Of course, this argument can be reversed, along the lines of ‘you can’t prove that god doesn’t exist/that evolution is right’. But as there is more evidence for the lack of god (from Hyena clitorises onwards) than for god, I don’t see what profit there is in it.
Keep on rocking in the free world...
