Theists, are you immune to being decieved?

[The Reality Salesman01]

This may be picking nits, but there is only one version each of theism and atheism. The various theistic relgions aren't versions of theism, they are religions with theism as a feature. If one theistic religion were proved true, the premise of theism that some sort of God or gods exist would be proven true and atheism would be falsified, and all religions incompatible with the god/God demonstrated to exist would be falsified.

Of course, atheists need do no work to falsify all the gods that have been conceived or can be conceived. We'll just continue to note the null hypothesis is preserved until it is overcome.

This is true. Theism is painted with a pretty broad brush. Christianity, however, is not quite as vague. If Hunahpu Gutch, one of the 13 Gods that created humans on accident ends up being the right version of Theism, both Christians, and Atheists are wrong about God. Of course, this would be much easier for the Atheist to swallow. Afterall, they hadn't spent their entire life worshipping an imaginary friend. In the face of whatever evidence that proves 'ole Hunahpu, I'll gladly give in. There's no shame in that if it's proven. Something tells me that even if a different God gets proven, the Christian will see it as a test, and will go on being wrong even in the face of whatever evidence proves a different God.

---

---

How does that follow? Can you see the people feeling different parts of the same elephant meme?
I am making an argument based on multiple types of theism being partly true not entirely true.

No, you're just getting on the bandwagon of trying to assert that your belief in your specific religion is justifiable if any sort of God is shown to exist. Forgetting the fact that no god has ever been shown to exist, you don't believe in just any god. You believe, exclusively, in a very specific God, whose first commandment is that you shall have no other Gods. It's not enough for you to prove theism right. You have to prove your specific interpretation of Christianity right. Otherwise, all you're attempting to do is prove both of us wrong.

NO! At best you could argue that the Christian might be partly wrong, if their understanding of one version of God - the one they mistakenly hold to - is unmistakenly proven to be something objectively different to the universally agreed concept of what the bible says.

I'm sorry, but if Brahma comes down to earth tomorrow, everything in the Bible is automatically invalidated. If Allah comes down to earth, the idea of Christian salvation is invalidated. You don't get to call it a victory unless Jesus Christ himself comes down to earth.

You of all people know that biblical theists, while agreeing on much/most of the theological distinctives and yet can still disagree on various points. (Courtier's Reply)

That just makes me think you're all full of shit, since many of you ca't even agree on such basics as whether Jesus was human or not.

Demanding unanimity as a benchmark is a bit too cute considering the category is atheism versus theism, not atheism versus catholicism or atheism versus protestantism.

It's not too cute, because you're not simply a theist. Your beliefs make you just as atheistic as I am regarding every god but the one you've made a special exception for. You don't get to say that you believe in the One True God out of one side of your mouth and then, out of the other side, call it a victory if a competing God is revealed to exist.

Nope. Even if I WAS mistaken, my view would still be partly entailed in theism more broadly.

Doesn't matter.

Being mistaken about the nature of God is not the same as being mistaken about the existence of God.

Again, it is your burden to not only prove that gods exist, but that the specific God you believe in exists. It is not our burden to prove that they don't.

Islam is equally true to Judaism and Christianity on a huge number of matters. Ten of which I can name off by heart.

And absolutely contradictory on some extremely basic matters, to the point where if one is right, the others are very wrong in some vital ways.

---