Just want to share — Don’t Pray for Me

As an atheist, I get people who want to pray for my soul that does not exist.  So, in honor of that, I just want to share my favorite quote. “Damn it … don’t you dare ask God to help me.” This is the last thing ever said by movie star Joan Crawford.  If it was good enough for her, it’s good enough for me.  I don’t want any god of any form to be asked to help me.  I don’t need it, I don’t want it, stop asking for it.  I just wanted to share my thoughts.  Now I feel better.   Now, back to watching Spongebob Squarepants.  Have a good day my fellow non-believers….

What is the reward of the wicked?

In these modern days of immorality and evil, Answers in Genesis would like to remind all you non-believers out there that you are destined for an eternity in hell. From answersingenesis.com: The Bible presents a dichotomy between the wicked and the righteous. The Psalms greatly emphasize the difference between these two groups of people. Before we examine the reward of the wicked, we must clarify what this difference means. What places a person into the category of the wicked or the righteous? In one sense, we should all be counted among the wicked. The Bible makes it abundantly certain that all men are sinful. We are born with sin-cursed flesh into a sin-cursed world, and…

Devil’s Advocate: Facing the Giants

This is in response to the entry Facing the Giants. Old Rimmy sez: Cool your horses and stop trying to cause drama. Cursing a lot and attacking fellow atheists doesn’t make you edgy, or make your points more valid. It reeks of the same douchiness you label other atheists with in your post.  What you are saying isn’t new at all, and isn’t necessarily the best route to go in trying to spread atheism. Allow Old Rimmy to explain… I don’t know of how many atheists have called for a “war of ideas,” but you aren’t the first. Dawkins gave a great TED talk on “militant atheism” and our need to stop being civil to…

The Transcendental Argument for the Existence of God

Here is the argument, made famous by Greg Bahnsen, stated as succinctly as I can manage: By rejecting God, one implicitly rejects the only nonarbitrary basis for positing the existence of morality, order, causation, induction, sets, logic, numbers, and a whole host of other abstracts necessary for making the world intelligible. Such an arbitrary worldview is thus so defective on its face that its only adherents will be those who maintain a dogmatic belief in atheism—i.e., those who, as a matter of underlying precommitments, irrationally prioritize the rejection of God over the rejection of universal arbitrariness. Spread the word:ShareDiggEmailPrint

An Argument Against: The Transcendental Argument for the Existence of God

Today’s The Other Side post is here. Read it before you read my response. I want to break it down by sentence. By rejecting God, one implicitly rejects the only nonarbitrary basis for positing the existence of morality, order, causation, induction, sets, logic, numbers, and a whole host of other abstracts necessary for making the world intelligible. I will actually tackle two aspects of this sentence separately. First, this argument states that many abstracts require god to be non-arbitrary (and I do not capitalize god because I do not reject it being any god or gods.) This is simply not true. Morality can easily be driven by evolution. Order falls under the laws of physics,…

For Atheists, Everything Is a Matter of Opinion

In the comments to my previous post arguing that atheism cannot account for morality, Nate asks: “[w]hy must there be a transcendental reality” to account for morality? It’s a fair question, though not a novel one.  Philosophical skepticism is at the core of epistemological inquiry concerning the nature and extent of human knowledge.  In his Meditations, Rene Descartes asked this question not just about morality, but about the entire scope of what we purport to know.  In his famous thought experiment, Descartes plunged himself into universal doubt, acknowledging the possibility that our minds were being manipulated by an “evil genius” to falsely believe in the reality of an external world around us.  The first step to…

To the Contrary: Atheism Cannot Account for Objective Morality

AtheistConnect published several posts recently concerning the question whether it is necessary to posit the existence of God to provide a cogent account for objective morality.  For the reasons briefly stated below, among others, I argue the affirmative:  God is necessary to provide an account of objective morality and, accordingly, atheism necessarily cannot provide such an account. First, consider the argument made in this article referenced in Nate’s post: Even if we accept that it’s true that there is no point in being moral if there is no God, this wouldn’t be an argument against atheism in the sense of showing that atheism isn’t true, rational, or justified. It wouldn’t provide any reason to think…