If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(My San Antonio)   Mega-church in San Antonio invites atheist to speak to nearly 8,000 people at four different church services. Civility ensues   (mysanantonio.com) divider line 264
    More: Hero, San Antonio, Hemant Mehta  
•       •       •

14307 clicks; posted to Main » on 09 Jul 2013 at 3:40 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



264 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-07-09 03:45:20 AM
What, it has got to be an Onion.
In Texas?
No way. I've gotta stop drinking.
 
2013-07-09 03:48:29 AM
Many atheists are former Christians who wrestled with doubt, but they felt like their churches weren't safe places to ask uncomfortable questions, Frazee said. So they simply abandoned their churches.

Sounds like he's going to lasso them back in with understanding of their doubts and fears. God needs money!
 
2013-07-09 03:54:34 AM
anyone remember when madeline murray ohare used to do a "debate" with a christian fundamentalist from town to town

profit
 
2013-07-09 04:00:08 AM
Yay! An atheist thread!
 
2013-07-09 04:00:15 AM
"Clean-cut and courteous, Mehta could easily be mistaken for a church youth-group leader. "

because most of us atheists are a bunch of scruffy rude wierdos dontchaknow
 
2013-07-09 04:00:29 AM
Flanders interviews the atheist brown Flanders.
 
2013-07-09 04:00:36 AM
The only way to win is to not play the game.
 
2013-07-09 04:01:37 AM
"Unless I experience a miracle that I just can't explain, unless something happens to me, I really don't think I'm going to hear anything that's going to change my mind," the skeptic replied.

That makes you an agnostic, moron, not an atheist. Atheists refuse to even consider the possibility of a higher power because it's logically impossible. Agnostics are open to the idea, but don't accept the existence of any sort of higher power because no proof exists, and they refuse to pretend to possess ultimate knowledge of the entire universe.
 
2013-07-09 04:03:02 AM
Rally the Militant Agnostics!
"I don't know and YOU DON'T EITHER!"
 
2013-07-09 04:03:22 AM
Worst "atheist" ever.
 
2013-07-09 04:03:35 AM
William Hemant Mehta probably knows that he's following Cicero's Rules of Rhetoric (the art of persuasion, as it's often called).

If you want to convince people of something, you're much more likely to get them to listen if you are friendly and personable than if you're insulting and condescending.

This can be done in a completely honest manner with no ulterior motives.  What does William Mehta have to gain by doing what he does?  Quite a bit, even if he only convinces a few people that his position is rational and not hostile to them as people.  They might convince others.  What does he have to lose?  Very little, since at this point in the history of the U.S. discussions involving religion (of the lack of it) tend to be very heated and volatile.

I applaud this man.  I don't like living in a society where people reach for their (metaphorical) sidearms the moment someone disagrees with them.
 
2013-07-09 04:04:14 AM
i.imgur.com

/history will vindicate me as the post that makes the most sense in this thread
 
2013-07-09 04:05:34 AM
So a pastor gave a buddy of his a free trip and free promo for his book?
 
2013-07-09 04:07:33 AM
It makes sense. On the one hand, you've got a guy who believes that this world is all we've got and we've got to go get as much as we can because otherwise there's no meaning to life at all, and on the other hand you've got a guy who has figured out how to trick people into giving him money for no good reason.

It's like a match made in heaven. Or by accident. Depending on what your belief system is.
 
2013-07-09 04:08:39 AM

HotWingAgenda: That makes you an agnostic, moron, not an atheist. Atheists refuse to even consider the possibility of a higher power because it's logically impossible. Agnostics are open to the idea, but don't accept the existence of any sort of higher power because no proof exists, and they refuse to pretend to possess ultimate knowledge of the entire universe.


Are you trying to suggest that it's impossible to prove something doesn't exist? Because the proof that there doesn't exist a pair of integers (a, b) such that (a / b) * (a / b) = 2 pre-dates Christianity.
 
2013-07-09 04:10:58 AM

HotWingAgenda: "Unless I experience a miracle that I just can't explain, unless something happens to me, I really don't think I'm going to hear anything that's going to change my mind," the skeptic replied.

That makes you an agnostic, moron, not an atheist. Atheists refuse to even consider the possibility of a higher power because it's logically impossible. Agnostics are open to the idea, but don't accept the existence of any sort of higher power because no proof exists, and they refuse to pretend to possess ultimate knowledge of the entire universe.


See Strong Atheism vs Weak Atheism. He is an atheist.

/Look, you know you're sitting at a computer, even if you can't rule out the possibility that you're hooked up to a Matrix-like machine. If you ever wake up in a vat of pink goo, you'll need to reevaluate, but in the meantime you can take yourself to know the ordinary things about the external world. Do not mistake the criteria for knowing that you know that you're sitting at a computer for the criteria for knowing that you're sitting at a computer.
 
2013-07-09 04:12:15 AM
Wow, lot of jaded folks in this thread (yeah yeah, welcometofark.jpg)... Oh noes, he used a sentence that puts him closer to agnostic than atheist.

Seriously, good on both of them for having a civilized, rational talk on something that too often sends both sides frothing at the mouth.
 
2013-07-09 04:12:42 AM

HotWingAgenda: "Unless I experience a miracle that I just can't explain, unless something happens to me, I really don't think I'm going to hear anything that's going to change my mind," the skeptic replied.

That makes you an agnostic, moron, not an atheist. Atheists refuse to even consider the possibility of a higher power because it's logically impossible. Agnostics are open to the idea, but don't accept the existence of any sort of higher power because no proof exists, and they refuse to pretend to possess ultimate knowledge of the entire universe.


I've never understood why the bar for so many people seems to be set at something they "can't explain".  I don't think my ability to explain or understand is absolute, and I don't confuse my lack of knowledge or understanding as a lack of underlying reason.
 
2013-07-09 04:16:13 AM
miniflea:
I've never understood why the bar for so many people seems to be set at something they "can't explain".  I don't think my ability to explain or understand is absolute, and I don't confuse my lack of knowledge or understanding as a lack of underlying reason.

I actually agree with this. If I saw something I personally could not explain my first assumption would be that I didn't understand it due to a lack of knowledge on my part, not that it was miraculous. That is the kind of thinking that creates nonsense like ID.

/also, atheism most definitely does NOT mean 'not prepared to consider' anything, it can easily mean that having considered all available information the person has decided that there is probably no god and to live their life on that assumption.. without gods. a-theist. So tired of explaining this stuff tho.
 
2013-07-09 04:18:54 AM

HotWingAgenda: "Unless I experience a miracle that I just can't explain, unless something happens to me, I really don't think I'm going to hear anything that's going to change my mind," the skeptic replied.

That makes you an agnostic, moron, not an atheist. Atheists refuse to even consider the possibility of a higher power because it's logically impossible. Agnostics are open to the idea, but don't accept the existence of any sort of higher power because no proof exists, and they refuse to pretend to possess ultimate knowledge of the entire universe.


I think that one can be atheist and  know there is no god, yet still acknowledge that the only thing that could make you think otherwise is tangible proof. I think his answer was rubbish, though "a miracle I can't explain", well that's just ignorance, they all have that, they think toast with a face on it is proof, but "God coming down and saying, oh I forgot to put in your belief system in the brain, here, let me get that for you..." that would make me believe in god, even though I know 100% that there is no god.

Basically there is no god, but there is something that would make me believe otherwise, and that is if there was a god, but there isn't so it's ok to speculate.
 
2013-07-09 04:19:58 AM

miniflea: HotWingAgenda: "Unless I experience a miracle that I just can't explain, unless something happens to me, I really don't think I'm going to hear anything that's going to change my mind," the skeptic replied.

That makes you an agnostic, moron, not an atheist. Atheists refuse to even consider the possibility of a higher power because it's logically impossible. Agnostics are open to the idea, but don't accept the existence of any sort of higher power because no proof exists, and they refuse to pretend to possess ultimate knowledge of the entire universe.

I've never understood why the bar for so many people seems to be set at something they "can't explain".  I don't think my ability to explain or understand is absolute, and I don't confuse my lack of knowledge or understanding as a lack of underlying reason.


This makes you a "hard atheist". Even if presented with evidence, you reject any attempt to invoke the supernatural.
 
2013-07-09 04:21:01 AM

ZoeNekros: HotWingAgenda: "Unless I experience a miracle that I just can't explain, unless something happens to me, I really don't think I'm going to hear anything that's going to change my mind," the skeptic replied.

That makes you an agnostic, moron, not an atheist. Atheists refuse to even consider the possibility of a higher power because it's logically impossible. Agnostics are open to the idea, but don't accept the existence of any sort of higher power because no proof exists, and they refuse to pretend to possess ultimate knowledge of the entire universe.

See Strong Atheism vs Weak Atheism. He is an atheist.

/Look, you know you're sitting at a computer, even if you can't rule out the possibility that you're hooked up to a Matrix-like machine. If you ever wake up in a vat of pink goo, you'll need to reevaluate, but in the meantime you can take yourself to know the ordinary things about the external world. Do not mistake the criteria for knowing that you know that you're sitting at a computer for the criteria for knowing that you're sitting at a computer.


its 9.20am in the morning here. I already don't know what's going on
 
2013-07-09 04:22:38 AM

AverageAmericanGuy: This makes you a "hard atheist". Even if presented with evidence, you reject any attempt to invoke the supernatural.


One must consider the possibility of being mistaken about the evidence. Lots of people being wrong is finitely probable. God is by definition infinitely improbable.
 
2013-07-09 04:23:55 AM

miniflea: HotWingAgenda: "Unless I experience a miracle that I just can't explain, unless something happens to me, I really don't think I'm going to hear anything that's going to change my mind," the skeptic replied.

That makes you an agnostic, moron, not an atheist. Atheists refuse to even consider the possibility of a higher power because it's logically impossible. Agnostics are open to the idea, but don't accept the existence of any sort of higher power because no proof exists, and they refuse to pretend to possess ultimate knowledge of the entire universe.

I've never understood why the bar for so many people seems to be set at something they "can't explain".  I don't think my ability to explain or understand is absolute, and I don't confuse my lack of knowledge or understanding as a lack of underlying reason.


It's not the "can't explain it" that's the problem. It's the "there's no need to try" that's the problem. Faith is where curiosity goes to die.
 
2013-07-09 04:24:10 AM
A Texan mega-church acting civil and hosting an open, honest discussion with an atheist?

Holy shiat...I'm witnessing a miracle...

Praise white Jesus!
 
2013-07-09 04:25:22 AM

AverageAmericanGuy: miniflea: HotWingAgenda: "Unless I experience a miracle that I just can't explain, unless something happens to me, I really don't think I'm going to hear anything that's going to change my mind," the skeptic replied.

That makes you an agnostic, moron, not an atheist. Atheists refuse to even consider the possibility of a higher power because it's logically impossible. Agnostics are open to the idea, but don't accept the existence of any sort of higher power because no proof exists, and they refuse to pretend to possess ultimate knowledge of the entire universe.

I've never understood why the bar for so many people seems to be set at something they "can't explain".  I don't think my ability to explain or understand is absolute, and I don't confuse my lack of knowledge or understanding as a lack of underlying reason.

This makes you a "hard atheist". Even if presented with evidence, you reject any attempt to invoke the supernatural.


You are either an enormous idiot or very skilled at appearing to be so.

I'd consider myself agnostic I suppose.  I think that the conceit that there is absolutely no god is just that, a conceit.  The question is inherently unknowable.  My own opinion is that it is unlikely, but as I stated above I do not think my understanding of the world is or is capable of being perfect.
 
2013-07-09 04:26:22 AM
Is it too soon to throw this into the pot?

See, the reason people feel comfortable believing a certain way is because of their personality type.  No, really.  People whose feelings about their beliefs are at odds with the way they're supposed to feel about the beliefs they were raised with will tend to be disillusioned and will often go "church shopping" until they find what they feel most comfortable believing in.  Well, now you don't have to "church shop"!  Just use this handy chart!  Do not doubt the chart.  It knows you better than you do.

i228.photobucket.com
 
2013-07-09 04:27:02 AM

gaspode: "Clean-cut and courteous, Mehta could easily be mistaken for a church youth-group leader. "

because most of us atheists are a bunch of scruffy rude wierdos dontchaknow


Arent we?

/scratches beard, sips whiskey and makes another post on an internet forum at 3am
 
2013-07-09 04:27:32 AM

AverageAmericanGuy: miniflea: HotWingAgenda: "Unless I experience a miracle that I just can't explain, unless something happens to me, I really don't think I'm going to hear anything that's going to change my mind," the skeptic replied.

That makes you an agnostic, moron, not an atheist. Atheists refuse to even consider the possibility of a higher power because it's logically impossible. Agnostics are open to the idea, but don't accept the existence of any sort of higher power because no proof exists, and they refuse to pretend to possess ultimate knowledge of the entire universe.

I've never understood why the bar for so many people seems to be set at something they "can't explain".  I don't think my ability to explain or understand is absolute, and I don't confuse my lack of knowledge or understanding as a lack of underlying reason.

This makes you a "hard atheist". Even if presented with evidence, you reject any attempt to invoke the supernatural.


The moment you have evidence of something it is no longer supernatural.
 
2013-07-09 04:28:13 AM

miniflea: AverageAmericanGuy: miniflea: HotWingAgenda: "Unless I experience a miracle that I just can't explain, unless something happens to me, I really don't think I'm going to hear anything that's going to change my mind," the skeptic replied.

That makes you an agnostic, moron, not an atheist. Atheists refuse to even consider the possibility of a higher power because it's logically impossible. Agnostics are open to the idea, but don't accept the existence of any sort of higher power because no proof exists, and they refuse to pretend to possess ultimate knowledge of the entire universe.

I've never understood why the bar for so many people seems to be set at something they "can't explain".  I don't think my ability to explain or understand is absolute, and I don't confuse my lack of knowledge or understanding as a lack of underlying reason.

This makes you a "hard atheist". Even if presented with evidence, you reject any attempt to invoke the supernatural.

You are either an enormous idiot or very skilled at appearing to be so.

I'd consider myself agnostic I suppose.  I think that the conceit that there is absolutely no god is just that, a conceit.  The question is inherently unknowable.  My own opinion is that it is unlikely, but as I stated above I do not think my understanding of the world is or is capable of being perfect.


So is there anything that could convince you that a supernatural being existed?
 
2013-07-09 04:28:35 AM
I generally refer to myself as being atheist, although there is an unanswerable question about it.  Even if you are atheist, there is always the possibility that there was a Creator who pushed the big red button to start the Universe.  Or effectively equivalently, she could have built the Matrix we live inside.  If such a creator never interacts with the contents of her Universe, from the perspective of the inhabitants of our Universe, her existence or nonexistence is irrelevant to our daily lives.  Being unfalsifiable, such a question is necessarily relegated to philosophy and Wachowski movies.

I suppose that atheism would more accurately be defined as the belief that there is no being outside our Universe that interacts with our Universe.  From this, you can derive the other tenets of atheism, such as that there is nothing supernatural or paranormal.
 
2013-07-09 04:29:28 AM

HotWingAgenda: That makes you an agnostic, moron

...

See?  Once the name-calling starts, forget about having a reasonable discussion

.

Lady J: its 9.20am in the morning here. I already don't know what's going on


As you probably know, it's all downhill from here.  It's 4:00 A.M. here.  Going back to bed.
 
2013-07-09 04:31:17 AM

AverageAmericanGuy: miniflea: AverageAmericanGuy: miniflea: HotWingAgenda: "Unless I experience a miracle that I just can't explain, unless something happens to me, I really don't think I'm going to hear anything that's going to change my mind," the skeptic replied.

That makes you an agnostic, moron, not an atheist. Atheists refuse to even consider the possibility of a higher power because it's logically impossible. Agnostics are open to the idea, but don't accept the existence of any sort of higher power because no proof exists, and they refuse to pretend to possess ultimate knowledge of the entire universe.

I've never understood why the bar for so many people seems to be set at something they "can't explain".  I don't think my ability to explain or understand is absolute, and I don't confuse my lack of knowledge or understanding as a lack of underlying reason.

This makes you a "hard atheist". Even if presented with evidence, you reject any attempt to invoke the supernatural.

You are either an enormous idiot or very skilled at appearing to be so.

I'd consider myself agnostic I suppose.  I think that the conceit that there is absolutely no god is just that, a conceit.  The question is inherently unknowable.  My own opinion is that it is unlikely, but as I stated above I do not think my understanding of the world is or is capable of being perfect.

So is there anything that could convince you that a supernatural being existed?


As stated above, if one existed it would by definition not be supernatural.  But to answer your question, yes, there is.  Solid evidence.  Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
 
2013-07-09 04:32:08 AM

miniflea: AverageAmericanGuy: miniflea: AverageAmericanGuy: miniflea: HotWingAgenda: "Unless I experience a miracle that I just can't explain, unless something happens to me, I really don't think I'm going to hear anything that's going to change my mind," the skeptic replied.

That makes you an agnostic, moron, not an atheist. Atheists refuse to even consider the possibility of a higher power because it's logically impossible. Agnostics are open to the idea, but don't accept the existence of any sort of higher power because no proof exists, and they refuse to pretend to possess ultimate knowledge of the entire universe.

I've never understood why the bar for so many people seems to be set at something they "can't explain".  I don't think my ability to explain or understand is absolute, and I don't confuse my lack of knowledge or understanding as a lack of underlying reason.

This makes you a "hard atheist". Even if presented with evidence, you reject any attempt to invoke the supernatural.

You are either an enormous idiot or very skilled at appearing to be so.

I'd consider myself agnostic I suppose.  I think that the conceit that there is absolutely no god is just that, a conceit.  The question is inherently unknowable.  My own opinion is that it is unlikely, but as I stated above I do not think my understanding of the world is or is capable of being perfect.

So is there anything that could convince you that a supernatural being existed?

As stated above, if one existed it would by definition not be supernatural.  But to answer your question, yes, there is.  Solid evidence.  Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.


And you think I'm the one talking in circles.
 
2013-07-09 04:34:33 AM
There is no significant difference between an atheist and an agnostic. People that have never taken a philosophy class just think that they are different.
 
2013-07-09 04:34:36 AM
No, I think you lack the ability to reason.

Or, you're a troll.  You did provoke me into calling you stupid.
 
2013-07-09 04:40:05 AM

Copper Spork: AverageAmericanGuy: This makes you a "hard atheist". Even if presented with evidence, you reject any attempt to invoke the supernatural.

One must consider the possibility of being mistaken about the evidence. Lots of people being wrong is finitely probable. God is by definition infinitely improbable.


Dude, your infinite improbability drive is charging up...
 
2013-07-09 04:40:16 AM
Why wouldn't there be anything but civility? The only people who assault and berate invited speakers are campus leftists, precious few of which are found in churches.
It's a shame, really, because the sort who molest invited speakers really could use some moral education.
 
2013-07-09 04:40:33 AM

miniflea: No, I think you lack the ability to reason.

Or, you're a troll.  You did provoke me into calling you stupid.


I just said you were a hard atheist. Nothing you've written has suggested otherwise.

It does seem you're a bit touchy about it. Would you prefer to be called a soft atheist? I can do that, if you prefer.
 
2013-07-09 04:41:26 AM

dfenstrate: It's a shame, really, because the sort who molest invited speakers really could use some moral education.


Why would you go to a church for education in morality?
 
2013-07-09 04:42:22 AM
I had a teacher who once claimed that absolutely nothing could persuade her that a supernatural being exists.  I asked: "what if the skies parted, a giant hand pointed from the heavens, directly at you, and a booming voice resounded 'Prof. [Smith], I am the Lord God' while the sun danced throughout the sky and clouds rearranged into the tetragrammaton, all witnessed by hundreds of millions of people and recorded on video?"

"Nope, mass hysteria."
 
2013-07-09 04:42:59 AM

Copper Spork: AverageAmericanGuy: This makes you a "hard atheist". Even if presented with evidence, you reject any attempt to invoke the supernatural.

One must consider the possibility of being mistaken about the evidence. Lots of people being wrong is finitely probable. God is by definition infinitely improbable.


If you believe that any evidence that would prove the supernatural to be in error, then you are also a hard atheist.
 
2013-07-09 04:43:50 AM

Slaxl: The moment you have evidence of something it is no longer supernatural.


The supernatural is supernatural for a reason - it is not bound by naturalism. It is beyond our ability to detect and observe it. If it can be detected, then it can be studied under the realm of science. It can then be tested, catalogued, predicted and used as a functional theory, property or law of the Universe, and added to the existing pantheon of human knowledge. At that point, its no longer supernatural. The plane of human understanding regarding once-thought supernatural ideas -- from electricity to diseases -- has shrunk considerably over the past 500 years and there's no reason why it won't continue to shrink as science learns more and more about the observable Universe.

In fact, the only way the supernatural can exist and not be within the realm of science is for its effects to be completely and utterly random, which might be the case if you want to include quantum reality but it's not much of a fun thing to believe in since it adds no useful information to human beliefs -- it's just inconsistent, meaningless noise.
 
2013-07-09 04:44:53 AM

Captain Dan: I had a teacher who once claimed that absolutely nothing could persuade her that a supernatural being exists.  I asked: "what if the skies parted, a giant hand pointed from the heavens, directly at you, and a booming voice resounded 'Prof. [Smith], I am the Lord God' while the sun danced throughout the sky and clouds rearranged into the tetragrammaton, all witnessed by hundreds of millions of people and recorded on video?"

"Nope, mass hysteria."


There are more likely explanations than mass hysteria. Two examples are dickish, advanced aliens (improbable, but far more likely than God), or your teacher being deluded into believing that there were hundreds of millions of witnesses.
 
2013-07-09 04:48:09 AM
so having now rtfa, there's something that's odd to me about it

'On Sunday, a few members of the congregation at Oak Hills didn't want to listen to a nonbeliever and they left before Mehta was introduced, Frazee said. But most of the feedback was overwhelmingly positive. "I think it was healthy," said church member Jim Robbins. Mehta's words struck a chord with him because one of Robbins' sons had been an atheist for many years. "I don't have a problem with people asking questions." '

i can't articulate it. does anyone understand what im driving at?

/stupid question
 
2013-07-09 04:49:06 AM

Ishkur: Slaxl: The moment you have evidence of something it is no longer supernatural.

The supernatural is supernatural for a reason - it is not bound by naturalism. It is beyond our ability to detect and observe it. If it can be detected, then it can be studied under the realm of science. It can then be tested, catalogued, predicted and used as a functional theory, property or law of the Universe, and added to the existing pantheon of human knowledge. At that point, its no longer supernatural. The plane of human understanding regarding once-thought supernatural ideas -- from electricity to diseases -- has shrunk considerably over the past 500 years and there's no reason why it won't continue to shrink as science learns more and more about the observable Universe.

In fact, the only way the supernatural can exist and not be within the realm of science is for its effects to be completely and utterly random, which might be the case if you want to include quantum reality but it's not much of a fun thing to believe in since it adds no useful information to human beliefs -- it's just inconsistent, meaningless noise.


Quantum mechanics doesn't count.  Though seemingly bizarre, it follows clear mathematical rules.  Random only in certain predictable ways.
 
2013-07-09 04:49:45 AM
Copper Spork:   There are more likely explanations than mass hysteria. Two examples are dickish, advanced aliens (improbable, but far more likely than God), or your teacher being deluded into believing that there were hundreds of millions of witnesses.

Advanced aliens who have the power to move a star and address earthlings on intercom seems like a likelier explanation?

If you're going to go down that route, I would have tried the "we're all really in the Matrix and this was a programmed illusion" argument.
 
2013-07-09 04:52:18 AM

Captain Dan: I had a teacher who once claimed that absolutely nothing could persuade her that a supernatural being exists. I asked: "what if the skies parted, a giant hand pointed from the heavens, directly at you, and a booming voice resounded 'Prof. [Smith], I am the Lord God' while the sun danced throughout the sky and clouds rearranged into the tetragrammaton, all witnessed by hundreds of millions of people and recorded on video?"


This is my proof of God also.

Although not so personal, because personal experiences are inadmissible as evidence. I want something on a much larger scale. God has to personally come down and take a giant wizz in the Black Sea, flooding the Crimea. Or sink Australia to the bottom of the ocean, or crack the Himalayas in half, or something truly epic. And it has to be Him actually doing it in the form that would be recognizably Him. Not as an asteroid or a natural disaster. A giant bearded man doing something inhumanly possible and all of humanity witnessing it and recording it.

And Christopher Hitchens is riding on his shoulder...
 
2013-07-09 04:57:49 AM

AverageAmericanGuy:This makes you a "hard atheist". Even if presented with evidence, you reject any attempt to invoke the supernatural.



Certain things make me a hard atheist. Like women.

But to be fair, the guys mission wasn't to debate or to stomp on anyone's beliefs. He just wanted to let Christians have a chance to talk to an atheist.
 
2013-07-09 04:58:14 AM

Ishkur: Although not so personal, because personal experiences are inadmissible as evidence. I want something on a much larger scale. God has to personally come down and take a giant wizz in the Black Sea, flooding the Crimea. Or sink Australia to the bottom of the ocean, or crack the Himalayas in half, or something truly epic. And it has to be Him actually doing it in the form that would be recognizably Him. Not as an asteroid or a natural disaster. A giant bearded man doing something inhumanly possible and all of humanity witnessing it and recording it.

And Christopher Hitchens is riding on his shoulder...


How would you know that advanced aliens aren't doing doing that as a prank?  Or the Matrix programmers weren't having some fun?

Those would have to be possibilities, in that they are logically possible.  At some point, you either say, "I know that there's another possible logical explanation, but I think God is likelier" or say "literally nothing can ever convince me that God might exist."
 
Displayed 50 of 264 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report