Jagella

A few weeks ago I mentioned on another thread at Apologetics.org that I planned to declare victory in this debate. I feel such a declaration is long overdue, and if I am remiss, then I am remiss for not declaring this victory weeks ago. We skeptics and critics have worked long and hard to discredit religion and Christianity in particular. Seeing that we have indeed discredited some of the most fundamental tenets of religion such as the existence of gods and the historicity of miracles, we deserve credit for a job well done. Christians and other religionists rarely if ever will concede our victory, and if all else fails they will run from the debate hoping that nobody notices their having been proved wrong. We skeptics know what we’ve accomplished, and we should be proud of it.

At this point I would like to explain in detail the claims of Christians and other religionists that we skeptics have disproved or discredited. These claims are the following:

*God exists. We have demonstrated that not only is this claim false, it cannot conceivably be true. The being described as “God� by Christians cannot be reconciled with what we know about our world.

*There is a life after death. After many centuries of science studying life, not one bit of credible evidence has ever been uncovered that there is any life save this one. Moreover, traditional religious beliefs in heaven and hell have been discovered to be based in mythology much of it originating in pagan religions that even Christians would say are false. There is no life after death, no heaven to pine for, and no hell to fear.

*Belief in God and religious piety makes a person moral. Regarding this claim, we critics of religion need only sit back and watch Christians and other believers prove their own claim false! In fact, one need go no farther than this very forum to see that this claim is a transparent falsehood. Christians will rise up in the most vile and cruel anger when their beliefs are questioned and will lash out at the skeptic who dares to criticize their beliefs.

*The Bible is perfectly true. At best, the Bible contains some barbaric history, but it contains many fabrications and mistakes as well. Even the Roman Catholic Church has recently admitted that the Bible includes errors.

I could go on, but there’s always time for that later. I welcome any intelligent, polite questions, comments, or rebuttals that are decently written. As always, I will respond in kind.

Jagella

Toto

I think this is the wrong forum for this. Would you like it to be moved to GRD or EOG or P or . . ?

Juliana

Probably you are right, but then again what about this syllogism by Lucian:

"Ei gar eisì bômoi, eisì kai theoi; allá mên eisì bômoi: eisìn ara kaì theoi"

"If there are altars, there are also gods; but there are altars, ergo there are also gods."

What have you to say to that?

Juliana

mata leao

victory! you should be sounding the retreat! Evangelical Christianity is now the fastest growing religion in the world, with the new China stats in, eclipsing Islam.

Jagella

Numbers do not decide victory in a debate. Debates are won or lost based on the logic and the facts. We skeptics have both.

Regarding the growth of Christianity, I haven’t failed to notice that it’s growing in the poorest parts of the world while in the developed nations it’s in decline. What does that say about Christian beliefs? Do such beliefs do their “best� when people are poor, disadvantaged, and ignorant? It looks that way.

Jagella

mata leao

"feed the hungry, heal the sick, minister unto the poor" Jesus Christ...yep, looks that way! (hedonistic,sexually immoral, decadent,fat and greedy "West" take note!)

Toto

Still no Biblical Criticism here. I think I'll kick this one over to GRD.

Occams_Razor

What does it mean to "win the debate." I agree wholeheartedly that we have won the debate if logic is your criteria. In fact, I think the debate was over probably thousands of years ago. You don't need our advances in science to win logically over the fallacy-riddled minefields of apologetic thinkers. Of course we have better ammunition now but I don't think we have won. I think we win when the effect of our logic results in vast real world changes. Example: when people blowing up other people over fairy tales becomes a rare event.

PoodleLovinPessimist

It is just those qualities, hedonism, sexual freedom, decadence, "greed", and especially fatness, that puts the West in a position to do anything about poverty in the first place.

And just because the authors put a few pleasant platitudes in the mouth of their fictional character doesn't make him real.

Note how almost every religious sect labels freedom as immoral per se.

seebs

If you have a specific disproof of the existence of God, feel free to go ahead and present it. So far, the ones I've seen have been pretty weak.

Frankly, it seems to me that anyone looking at a philosophical question with which great minds have wrestled for millennia and declaring victory is flirting with hubris. If there is one thing that seems clear out of all the books written by people on both sides, it's that many more people are firmly convinced of their positions than can possibly be correct. The leap from "I am sure this argument is sound" to "this argument's conclusion is true" is not a safe one to make on this issue; a majority of people making it are necessarily wrong.