Argument from poor design. Link.


The argument from Quantum Physics

Believers should be more riled up by quantum physics than about evolution. Thankfully, to even understand what quantum physics is about, you actually need to do some reading. The monkey thing is easier to grasp.

– Newton, Farraday, Kepler, all the famous scientists that believers repeatedly claim on their side, all of them died long before the atomic age, and the discovery of the God-confounding mechanisms of pure chance that rule all quantum reactions.

The absurdity of God’s judgement

– “Creating imperfect beings and demanding more of them than they are capable is clearly a sign of either ineptitude or cruelty” - some guy
– “Created sick — Commanded to be well.” – Fulke Greville.
– Imagine a fireman, that first sets your house on fire, then comes to extinguish it and expects you to be in his debt, for “saving” you. That’s what the biblical God does to the human race. Created weak and morally vulnerable, then condemned for not being perfect. That is beyond fair, that is abhorrent and repulsive. Or imagine cutting half the tongue of your child, and then punishing him for failing to speak properly.

The morality of the biblical God

THEISTS of marked intellectual ability persistently avoid any attempt to defend the Christian’s notion of their God as he is delineated in the Bible. The reason, no doubt, of this is that the character given to the deity by the “inspired writers” is so contradictory and repulsive that no amount of reasoning will harmonize it with modern ideas of justice, purity, and morality. Now is it not inconsistent upon the part of Christians to preach to credulous congregations about the virtues of God, while they dare not endeavor to defend, in public discussion, the same Being before a critical audience? Surely orthodox exponents, to be consistent, should, when they undertake to prove the “existence of God,” confine their attention to the God of the Old and New Testaments. If they feel that they cannot do this, it is their duty to say so; and further, to be honest they should inform their followers that the character of he “Heavenly Father,” as depicted in the Bible, cannot be defended by reason and ethical science. Is it not a sham and a delusion to profess to believe in a being whose nature and conduct are indefensible?
The Existence of God or Questions for Theists – by Charles Watts. Link.

= Christian Apologetics: Hitler can’t help you. Link.

Argument from infinity

While not being much of a philosopher, the concept of infinity always smelled fishy to me, and never believed it was actually possible, even when I believed in an infinite God. Sure, I mostly excused God from deep logical scrutiny, but even then His omni-qualities raised some perplexing questions.

I would say now that God is impossible because infinity is impossible. The only realm where infinity can function is the abstract realm of human imagination. Same as God, basically 🙂

The following video raises the same problem, albeit with a more sophisticated approach.

– Responding to Objections, Part 5: Omnipotence. Youtube. Link.

Speaking in tongues

– Glossolalia, on Skeptic’s Dictionary. Link.

– 1 – I had witnessed some crazy shit at that concert, speaking in tongues, swaying and hand-waving, etc., but figured out a lot of it was just for show when that friend of mine was speaking in his fake Spanish that he often used to make us laugh when others burst out in their gibberish. He claimed he was filled with the spirit, that Jesus made him speak in tongues. I thought he was filled alright, filled with bullshit.