Powerfull Argument For Atheism:

[[The Looney Bin]]

The dinosaurs are returning...

So last night I was discussing with my Muslim friend about his religion, he has already made it clear to me that the Muslim religion is far less evil than Christianity (ie. temporary hell vs permanent hell).

Then I brought of this question: If god is god then he must be omniscient (able to see the future) and omnipotent (able to alter everything), meaning that either god does nothing (because if he did then he would have seen an inaccurate future, making him not omniscient, and therefore not god) or there is no god.

Then when god is portrayed in a religion as someone/something that usually does something that automatically means that religion is wrong.

Correct me if there are any holes in my argument, this is kind of a hard one to get from my head to words.

...and they want their oil back.

 

[Tenth Speed Writer]

This is actually a pretty well-used argument. It either prompts the traditional response of "God works on mysterious ways," or calls forth the more thought out answer that the world is broken, and that we are being tested and so forth. The latter begs the question, though, why? That, of course, simply brings back the traditional "mysterious ways" position in my mind, but then, the entire point is that it all defies logic.  

[Aaron Lee Morrison]

This is a very good argument.

 

[Fenky]

I'm a little confused. I can't really understand what you're trying to say. There's no holes in your arguement. It's just me. Could you dumb it down a little bit? Sometimes you guys are too smart for me.  

[Anti-Hearted]

what an excellent argument!
the point is proven.
and besides Id rather believe science.  

[Six Billion of Spades]

Yes, put God to the Minority Report test. Either he knows his future and can't change it, or he has the wrong one.

I like.

Besides, if God is eternal and unchanging, then I'd bet I could safely say that he has no future.  

[[x] Natasha [x]]

I shall steal a counter-arguement from my best friend (who just happens to be an extremely religious Christian)

"God has reasons for doing things which we cannot possibly understand. He created us and therefore must have reasoning far beyond our human understanding."

That's usually her argument when I start debating with her about stuff. To be fair, it's a pretty good argument.  

[Theophrastus]

[x] Natasha [x]

I shall steal a counter-arguement from my best friend (who just happens to be an extremely religious Christian)

"God has reasons for doing things which we cannot possibly understand. He created us and therefore must have reasoning far beyond our human understanding."

That's usually her argument when I start debating with her about stuff. To be fair, it's a pretty good argument.

No, it's a terrible argument.

If a person is going to debate with you and hope to mean anything with their points, there must be agreed upon rules, namely the rules that only facts and testable information will be used. When a person invokes the mystery of God, they're simply saying, "nobody can debate me, as I refuse to bring logic into the matter."

The problem with that is that we are logical beings in a world of provable items and expressible thoughts. The person who says that God is mysterious is hedging their bets; if one were to apply, to truly apply the same logic of "you can't understand God, so you can't not understand God!" is the one who must alos be agnostic about the Tooth Fairy, Invisible Pink Unicorn and Flying Spaghetti Monster.

To truly apply that belief system would require fealty to Wotan, Kali Durga and Huitzilopochtli.

And obviously your friend doesn't do that?

What that argument tries to do is put the responsibility on the skeptic, telling them that logic and rational approaches aren't good enough. The skeptic, however, is not the person making a ridiculous claim of unknowable, supernatural explanations.

Let me sum it up like this and give you a nice tool to use the next time someone invokes God's mystery. "If God is unknowable, then how do you know he's unknowable?"  

[[x] Natasha [x]]

Theophrastus

[x] Natasha [x]

I shall steal a counter-arguement from my best friend (who just happens to be an extremely religious Christian)

"God has reasons for doing things which we cannot possibly understand. He created us and therefore must have reasoning far beyond our human understanding."

That's usually her argument when I start debating with her about stuff. To be fair, it's a pretty good argument.

No, it's a terrible argument.

If a person is going to debate with you and hope to mean anything with their points, there must be agreed upon rules, namely the rules that only facts and testable information will be used. When a person invokes the mystery of God, they're simply saying, "nobody can debate me, as I refuse to bring logic into the matter."

The problem with that is that we are logical beings in a world of provable items and expressible thoughts. The person who says that God is mysterious is hedging their bets; if one were to apply, to truly apply the same logic of "you can't understand God, so you can't not understand God!" is the one who must alos be agnostic about the Tooth Fairy, Invisible Pink Unicorn and Flying Spaghetti Monster.

To truly apply that belief system would require fealty to Wotan, Kali Durga and Huitzilopochtli.

And obviously your friend doesn't do that?

What that argument tries to do is put the responsibility on the skeptic, telling them that logic and rational approaches aren't good enough. The skeptic, however, is not the person making a ridiculous claim of unknowable, supernatural explanations.

Let me sum it up like this and give you a nice tool to use the next time someone invokes God's mystery. "If God is unknowable, then how do you know he's unknowable?"

I hadn't looked at it that way...but I'm afraid that there will be rather a lot less debates between me and my friend partly because neither of us are taking RS next year.  

[SkeletonPhoenix]

I can't believe I'm going to post this but here goes nothing... Really.

Here is a counter arguement that I thought up.

But god can see the future even if he interfers because if he is truly omniscient then he can see every timeline and every reality with every out come. This just happens to be one of the timelines.

I bet you a cristian would never think of this arguement.

Also please find the faults in this before I lose it and become... Christian Nooooooooo.  

[ProjectOmicron88]

SkeletonPhoenix

I can't believe I'm going to post this but here goes nothing... Really.

Here is a counter arguement that I thought up.

But god can see the future even if he interfers because if he is truly omniscient then he can see every timeline and every reality with every out come. This just happens to be one of the timelines.

I bet you a cristian would never think of this arguement.

Also please find the faults in this before I lose it and become... Christian Nooooooooo.

Reading "The God Delusion" a bit recently has expanded my repertoire of counter-counter-arguments.

If God can see the future, he's omniscient...but if he can see the future, he must know what he's going to do in the future. If the timeline yet to come is immutable, and God can't change his mind about the action he knows he is going to take, then he's not omnipotent, and either does not exist, or does not deserve to be called God.

Thank you, Dr. Dawkins. smile  

[SkeletonPhoenix]

What I mean is he can still do anything beacause he knows every action he can take and all the outcomes. So even though he can still do anything he can still see the future.  

[ProjectOmicron88]

SkeletonPhoenix

What I mean is he can still do anything beacause he knows every action he can take and all the outcomes. So even though he can still do anything he can still see the future.

Yeah, I guess it does ultimately depend on whether you think the future is immutable or not.  

[Chaindoll Massacre]

Hmm. That definately makes a point. That also makes more of a point for people to hate god too. *plots evilness*