Questions for the atheists (The geeky christian)

[Exian]

That's cool, Cele. To each their own and your own is commendable. I would just caution: that shit doesn't get lighter or stay static. It only gets heavier. You're more than likely going to burn out your capacity for it at some point. I find that comedy and an ability to laugh about it allows me to carry it longer. It lightens me up.

And if you use comedy to face a difficult problem, well, then that's just the opposite of turning a blind eye. It becomes a little more sustainable.

I mean, Jon Stewart's been doing it for years.

[Chad32]

It would be nice if the answers were separate from the questions, so I could do a simple copy/paste with this.

1. Are you absolutely sure there is no God? If not, then is it not possible that there is a God? And if it is possible that God exists, then can you think of any reason that would keep you from wanting to look at the evidence?

I can be reasonably certain that gods don't exist, much like any other supernatural creature. Especially the type of god that desperately wants to be worshiped. I'm not aware there is any evidence for supernatural beings.


2. Would you agree that intelligently designed things call for an intelligent designer of them? If so, then would you agree that evidence for intelligent design in the universe would be evidence for a designer of the universe

I don't see anything in the world that wasn't made by the beings within it as intelligently designed. The more we find out about the universe, the more it looks like it wasn't.


3. Would you agree that nothing cannot produce something? If so, then if the universe did not exist but then came to exist, wouldn’t this be evidence of a cause beyond the universe?

No, I don't believe that something can come from nothing. Christians are the ones who seem to push the idea that things can be willed into existence. There has never actually been nothing in the universe. The universe was just much more compact at one time.


4. Would you agree with me that just because we cannot see something with our eyes—such as our mind, gravity, magnetism, the wind—that does not mean it doesn’t exist?

I can agree with that, though we can detect the things you mentioned with other senses and tools.


5. Would you also agree that just because we cannot see God with our eyes does not necessarily mean He doesn’t exist?

If we could detect him with other senses and tools, that would be enough to know he exists. We can't, so we have no good reason to believe.


6. In the light of the big bang evidence for the origin of the universe, is it more reasonable to believe that no one created something out of nothing or someone created something out of nothing?

I believe it is more reasonable to believe cosmic forces can eventually result in life, than some intelligent cosmic being that's capable of speaking things into existence. If you're going to argue for the immortality of this being to explain why he wasn't also created, I will argue for the universe's eternal existence. Also again, there is no such thing as nothing, unless you're a christian who believes matter comes into existence because someone wantsa them to badly enough.


7. Would you agree that something presently exists? If something presently exists, and something cannot come from nothing, then would you also agree that something must have always existed?

I find your questions a bit redundant. Yes, as far as I know the universe has always existed. It was just very compact at one time, then expanded outwards.


8. If it takes an intelligent being to produce an encyclopedia, then would it not also take an intelligent being to produce the equivalent of 1000 sets of an encyclopedia full of information in the first one-celled animal? (Even atheists such as Richard Dawkins acknowledges that “amoebas have as much information in their DNA as 1000 Encyclopaedia Britannicas.” Richard Dawkins, The Blind Watchmaker (New York: WW. Norton and Co., 1996), 116.)

Amoebas are evolved lifeforms. It does not take an intelligent designer to create life. It just takes particles, molecules, or whatever was already there enough time to get it done.


9. If an effect cannot be greater than its cause (since you can’t give what you do not have to give), then does it not make more sense that mind produced matter than that matter produced mind, as atheists say?

We have no evidence of a mind producing matter. We do have evidence of matter producing a mind.


10. Is there anything wrong anywhere? If so, how can we know unless there is a moral law?

Right and wrong is a complex subject. Morals come from our need to work in groups, as all social creatures do. The group sets up rules that allow the individuals to prosper, and those are our morals.


11. If every law needs a lawgiver, does it not make sense to say a moral law needs a Moral Lawgiver?

Sure.


12. Would you agree that if it took intelligence to make a model universe in a science lab, then it took super-intelligence to make the real universe?

We don't know that the universe had a beginning. Who is to say the compressed state that started our universe isn't a previous universe that collapsed on itsself? Given that the laws of physics that we use to figure out our universe didn't exist until after the big expansion, we don't know how to figure out what happened before that time. All we know is that the universe exists, and we don't know of any state where the universe didn't exist. Asking who made the universe is senseless at this point.


13. Would you agree that it takes a cause to make a small glass ball found in the woods? And would you agree that making the ball larger does not eliminate the need for a cause? If so, then doesn’t the biggest ball of all (the whole universe) need a cause?

We don't know if the universe was ever not there, so we don't know if it needed a cause. It's the same as asking what caused god.


14. If there is a cause beyond the whole finite (limited) universe, would not this cause have to be beyond the finite, namely, non-finite or infinite?

We don't know of anything that's beyond the universe. I see little point in worrying about it.


15. In the light of the anthropic principle (that the universe was fine-tuned for the emergence of life from its very inception), wouldn’t it make sense to say there was an intelligent being who preplanned human life?

Given the amount of space in the universe where life is not found, compared to the amount of space where it is found, I don't think the universe is fine tuned for life.

[Lemonvariable72]

I personally think that humour is one of the most effective tools against organized religion, asit strips away the awe, reference, power, and leaves it expose for what it really is. Ignorance tempered with hate.

[Natachan]

I went to the site and I read a few of this guy's articles.

I know some intelligent theists. This man is not one of them. He makes excuses, he belligerently asserts his position as truth. He arrogantly asses his position to be infallible. And he has done NO research into his facts, as some of his claims are false with wen a cursory investigation.

This mans only talent seems to be in formatting his site, which I will give him, looks very polished.

[Chad32]

Well, some of his later questions presume a certain answer to earlier ones. That's one flaw in the questionnaire. I get that we aren't able to answer each one before the next, but doing it his way leaves things redundant.

[Clueless Morgan]

It's all the same bullshit.

They think repeating nonsense questions will somehow make us start believing in an imaginary skymen.

They also think asking leading questions and ones that assume how you answered earlier ones will somehow trick you into believing their bullshit.

He arrogantly asses his position to be infallible.

Freudian slip?

[Natachan]

Auto correct. Damn you Apple!

[Tonus]

1. Are you absolutely sure there is no God?

Anyone else notice that the first nine questions are variations on "just because he isn't there, doesn't mean he isn't there"? Won't god have mercy on these guys and just show the fuck up already?

[Wyrd of Gawd]

Have you ever sat and waited with good people with terminal diseases as they slipped away?

I have.


Have you ever had to watch a patient die despite every effort you make?

I have.


Have you ever seen the body of a little boy so badly burned that he's barely recognisable as human?

I have.

Until you have too, please don't tell me about using humour to get through problems.

Even if you save a critically sick person he will still die and maybe in worse agony that what you saved him from. So what did you gain except cause the person more suffering? The totality of the situation should be considered.

[Whateverist]

Not at all sure what the hell theists are even claiming to believe in. I can't imagine what would or would not confirm the existence of a 'god'. If one materialized in front of me my first thought would be that I was hallucinating or dreaming. But even if something 'really' materialized in front of me, I still would not know if it was one of these 'god'-things. No clear and coherent definition exists. Perhaps it is just an advanced alien or unknown earth being?

That said, I'm fine with people interpreting and making sense of their consciousness any way they like. Call part of it god? Fine with me. So long as no one becomes imperialist about insisting everyone accept their interpretation of 'god', I really don't care if they want to emboss their belief with omni-powers, eternality and creator credentials. I will go on thinking all that is bat shit crazy but fine with me if they disagree.

I'm not willing to follow every variation of the question in the OP. This is all the answer I've got.