One thing I can’t understand is atheists way of thinking. They say Christians are ignorant and believing in our sky wizard makes us idiots. Why is it so hard to believe that God created everything? It makes more sense to me than by just saying there was a big boom and everything just fell into place. Now, THAT does not make sense. Ok, now you can start with the name calling.

– Seriously


Dear Seriously,

Let me do my best to help you understand the atheist way of thinking.  First, if you would allow me to define a few terms so that we may have a common understanding.  The term “ignorant” simply means a lack of knowledge, it is not synonymous with, nor does it infer that someone is, an “idiot”.  An “idiot” is someone who is incapable of learning; an antiquated term which was originally used to describe someone with a mental disability.

Now, if I were to make a formal argument and you had no knowledge of the rules concerning logic then you would be rightly described as “ignorant”.  Meaning you lack knowledge concerning those rules, not that you are incapable of acquiring the knowledge.  It appears that many Christians stop listening when they are accused of being “ignorant” because they automatically take it as some kind of insult.  Hell, I am ignorant of a great many things, it does not mean I am stupid nor does it mean you are.

Why is it so hard to believe that your God created everything?  The simple answer that there is no evidence that your God created anything.  You will likely disagree with that fact and there are so many fallacious arguments for a supernatural cause that I could spend all day listing and debunking them.  If you happen to have a favorite argument then let me know and I will explain the fallacy, but I digress.

The other problem with asserting that “god created everything” is that “god” lacks explanatory value.  That is to say, it only moves the problem of understanding the origin and operation of the cosmos from the natural to the supernatural.  Religion attempts to answer a HOW question with a pointless WHO answer.  If in answer to “How does water rain from the sky?” you stated “God”, the real question would remain unanswered.  The question was “how does” and not “who makes.”  If the eventual “how does” answer cannot exist without intent then we can start looking for the “who makes” answer.  Does that make sense so far?

In over 300 years our scientific interrogation of nature has yet to present a “how does” question that requires a “who makes” answer.  Everything we observer can be traced back to interactions which are governed by the four fundamental forces of nature (gravity, electromagnetism, the strong force and weak force).  There is no need for a “who makes” answer because the interactions governed by these forces never change, there is no decision to be made, there is no mind required.  Physical bodies WILL ALWAYS attract with a force proportional to their mass.  We call this the law of Gravity.  The speed of light in a vacuum WILL ALWAYS be 299,792,458 meters per second.

Now you may wish to claim that these physical laws require a creator but that leads us back to the original problem.  Asserting “God” just decided upon the physical laws of the cosmos does not explain anything; it only elevates a natural problem to a supernatural problem.  Why did God pick THESE specific laws?  We are ignorant of any alternate universes which possess different laws of physics so why even assume that they could BE any other way.

Again, the “God” answer explains nothing, is not required, and is unsupported by evidence.  That is the reason why we lack belief in the notion that gods created the cosmos.  As “God” has no explanatory value, to claim that “God makes more sense” is absurd.  Your parody of the Lambda-Cold Dark Matter model as nothing but a “big boom” reveals your ignorance of the subject.  Perhaps if you actually understood the evidence supporting the Big Bang Theory you would not be so quick to dismiss it and claim that it “does not make sense”.

This is the end of my reply and you will notice that I have not called you any names.  Would consider changing your prejudicial view of us non-believers now?

the day you and your science are able to create one human cell is the day you will win this argument (about god).

what say ye?

glad to see you used a word like inspiration . i thought that word was only in the christians dictionary.

back to that one human cell business,get busy. you have the challenge and your work lies ahead.

make me an xesit by having your science do so

one egg + one sperm = you or I

isnt creation great? call your supporters. you need them. no paste and cut.

speak from your heart only

thirdum wordum 7-19-1918


thirdum wordum,

Your comment breaks down to the following argument.

  • Premise One: Living cells exist.
  • Premise Two: Scientist cannot now create living cells.
  • Conclusion: God made living cells.

This is another classic argument from ignorance, a fallacy with which you appear to be very familiar.  You likely find this kind of spurious argument very useful when convincing credulous people to accept your magical faith claims; I know I did when I was involved in apologetics.  The difference between you and I is that I stopped espousing such arguments once the fallacy was revealed to me, you simply continue on dishonestly as if you are still ignorant of this fact.  It is an argument from ignorance because you are claiming that the ONLY origin of a living cell is supernatural and you do so because you are ignorant of any other method with which a cell could originate.

Your argument falls under the larger category labeled the “God of the gaps”; a theological perspective in which gaps in our scientific knowledge are taken as evidence or proof of God’s existence.  Such an argument is sometimes reduced to the following form:

  • There is a gap in understanding of some aspect of the natural world. (Origin of life)
  • Therefore the cause must be supernatural. (Your God!)

One of the most glaring problems with your argument is that, even at face value, it can be used to justify belief in an infinite number of gods.  If you were a Muslim you could claim Allah made living cells and so on and so forth.  Your argument only gets you as far deism.  You still have all your work ahead of you to show that this creator is not completely indifferent to humans.

With regard to your challenge, this might sound unusual coming from a non-believer but even if microbiologist did manage, with the aid of cutting edge nanotechnology, to create a cell, capable of all the feats required of a living organism, it would not disprove your notion of a creator.  The enigmatic creator described by most theist as being space-less, timeless, and immaterial, is completely un-falsifiable.  The creation of living cells in a laboratory would in no way falsify your assertion of a creator.  You could always move the goal post and claim that we were simply created with the intelligence to copy your god’s original work.  Theists have always moved the goal post when advances in knowledge have displaced their magical answers and there is no reason to suspect you will not continue that tradition when your specific challenge has been met.

Your demand that science make you an atheist is laughable.  Science is derived from the application of logic to objective facts found in the natural world.  Religion rejects facts and reasoning in favor of faith.  As facts and reason are necessary components in the application of science, any attempt to persuade you with science will fail.  So long as you deny reason you will remain trapped in your delusion.

You are correct, one egg and one sperm will produce offspring.  It is interesting to note that your knowledge of the existence of human gametes is a result of scientific inquiry and not divine revelation from your god.  Religion taught for thousands of years that it was the man who planted his seed inside the woman, that women were merely vessels for male reproduction and were to be treated as chattel.  Now you sit at your keyboard making magic claims while appealing to the very secular scientific knowledge your religion suppressed with fear and torture; all while still making fallacious arguments for your particular god; the nerve!  Why not crack open your bible?  Why not appeal to the claims made in your magic book?  Oh, that’s right; we already know that the myths and legends in that text have been debunked.

Creation is hardly great; a child can recognize the flaw in your statement instantly, IT IS UNFOUNDED.  You have presented absolutely no evidence for your claim.  “God made us!” you say.  OK, next question, what made god; and what made that; and what made that; so on and so forth.  Say hello to Mr. Infinite Regress.  Now, you avoid this obvious problem by committing the fallacy of special pleading, also called a double standard.  Conveniently, everything that exists requires an act of creation up until we arrive at your god, which for some unexplained reason does not require a creator.  Supernatural creation is not “great”; it is absurd and an affront the intelligence of the very minds that you seek to enslave.  Occam’s razor disposes of such problems, there is no creator.