Leaving aside all the straw-man reasons this is wrong for a moment:
I’m not sure how “a god who made everything came out of nothing” is any better than “everything came from nothing”. It seems to add an extra unnecessary layer.
You can believe what you like, of course, but try not to legally exclude people who believe differently.
I like the idea that anyone who tries to tell other people “what Jesus said” or “what Mohammed said” is essentially a medieval gossip.
It seems to be important for members of a religion (or any ideology) to believe that they’re constantly under attack, or having the opinions of others forced upon them.
I’m not entirely sure why anyone would so blatantly lust for victimhood, but it doesn’t really work when you’re unambiguously running the country.
A two-hour debate between Sye Ten Bruggencate and Matt Dillahunty last week. I am not recommending you watch it. This is a vanity post.
Normally I don’t post this kind of thing, but I have personal experience of Sye, who uses the internet handle SyeTenB and may be familiar to you as the brains behind proofthatgodexists.org. Apart from new wallpaper, it looks exactly like it did in 2007, when I first came across it. Like Zeno’s Paradox, the argument seems to be profound, when in fact it’s gibberish. If you’re interested, RationalWiki took one for the team and posted an unnecessary, lengthy refutation.
He had tracked me down based on some posts I made about atheism on an Irish message board (now defunct) and we got into an increasingly bizarre series of emails. Again, I strongly advise against this, but if you really want to see - click here. Although his sincerity puts him in the minority of trolls, he’s certainly a nasty piece of work.
On a whim, I put his name into Google, and discovered this same guy trolling: James Randi’s forums, where he had his ass handed to him; Free Thought Forums; and even some Christian Forums! In every one, he presents the same broken arguments. Every time, several people try to explain where he’s going wrong, and every time he either refuses to accept their arguments or just ignores them. Other people who have noticed the passage of this troll through their field of influence include this guy and this guy.
I’m starting to think that he has some psychological problem, given that he seems to be alienating every single person he comes across online. Furthermore, his condescending attitude seems to be incongruent with the number of concerned citizens who regularly and clearly prove him incorrect.
Does he really believe that he’s right and everyone else is wrong? Very possibly. If so, then he should be pitied rather than disdained, and maybe Christianity is the best place for him.
I’ll let Stephen Law, editor of the Royal Institute of Philosophy and senior lecturer in Philosophy at Heythrop College, University of London, have the final word with a highly effective, three-line refutation using his own logic: bullshit.
The top map is countries around the world that have laws punishing apostasy (leaving a religion).
The bottom map is countries (including where I live) that have laws punishing blasphemy (anything which could be interpreted as intentionally disrespectful of a religion).
In my country, the offence consists of publishing anything “grossly abusive or insulting in relation to matters held sacred by any religion”. As far as I know, no one’s ever been convicted, which indicates it’s more of an aspirational law than an enforced sanction.
So we have it easy, to be honest. I have a feeling things are not so merely aspirational for those living in the orange-coloured areas in the top map.
How is your religion different to a hoax religion?
God is more like homoeopathy.
Every religious person thinks all the other religions are wrong.
Maybe they’re all right.
The top map is marked with the route Alexander the Great used to take over the known world in 11 years.
The bottom map is marked with the route the Jews used to get to Canaan in 40 years.
Are you sure you want to be guided by God?