Claim Knowledge and Run

look_a_distraction_design_by_eecomicsNext from Smalley’s “Top Ten Reasons Why I’m an Athiest”, we have this:

4. Demeter, Jesus, Apollo, Horus, Zeus, Mithra, Yahweh, Tammuz, Ganesha, and Allah are only 10 of the thousands of gods recorded in history. An Atheist is not one that refuses to read religious doctrine; it is often one who reads too many. 

As before, it is very unclear what the argument actually is here. But I suppose that it is something like this:

Belief in any particular religion (presumably, Christianity) is as unreasonable as belief in these other deities.

The first thing to note here is that this is simply not true. Anyone who actually reads a lot of theology would understand that the gods of ancient temple religions are open to a host of objections that wouldn’t remotely address the God of modern monotheistic book religion.

Little, if any, of the case supporting the existence of a monotheist God would support polytheism. Even according to the ancient Greeks, Zeus isn’t the first cause of the universe. There is no sense in which Horus is supported by the moral argument. Nor did Quezacotl gain the slightest credibility from the discovery of fine tuning.

And so on it goes. The one who does not understand this simply does not know the basics of the subject. Referencing dead religions as if this were a point in itself is, therefore, a mistake of someone who has read very little theology.

This also seems to assume, implicitly, that secular views are immune to this sort of argument. Were it fair to say that religions should be wiped away on the grounds that there are so many, or so many that have been discredited, the counter that secular views have many discredited relatives wouldn’t be far behind.

There is almost nothing that mention of Zeus or Quetzalclatl will contribute to discussion over western monotheism. And most of that is to point out how different these views are. Really, this seems to be the act of gesturing in the general direction of something that vaguely looks like an argument. No rational point against theism has been made.

Thus, the act of putting this on a top ten list serves mostly to highlight how little real material exists for Smalley to post in support of his materialistic atheism.

Advertisements

44 responses to “Claim Knowledge and Run

  • Arkenaten

    The most ridiculous aspect of this post is that you actually believe that not only was Jesus divine but that he was a real person. And use this utter bullsh*t to rubbish other gods. Oh my word.
    And this is all based on what…evidence?
    Biblical evidence? A book that is one of the most fallacious group of documents ever to find its way to print.
    The divinely inspired (sic) bible that took how many years before a fixed canon was arrived at? And of course it wasn’t quite fixed even then was it?
    Lol….this is going to be so much fun, I am actually beginning to wonder if you are not, in fact, an atheist and are merely writing all this as a wind up.

    • paarsurrey

      “The most ridiculous aspect of this post is that you actually believe that not only was Jesus divine but that he was a real person. ”

      I don’t think Debilis has mentioned in the above post that Debilis believes in the divinity of Jesus.

      Jesus was a monotheist Jew and he used to address Yahweh out of love as God-the-Father; Jesus never believed in Christian-God named Trinity, in my opinion.

      I think this point needs to be explained by Debilis for everybody.

      Jesus son of Mary was a real human being.
      On what evidence the Atheists say that Jesus was not a real person? Arkenaten should give such evidence for us, if there is some.

      • Arkenaten

        He is a Christian youy twit, of course he believes Jesus was divine. Sheesh, you Muslims are completely off the fruitcake scale.
        Jesus was not a real human being any more than Moses was.

        The only evidence christians have to support an historical Jesus is the bible which can be demonstrated to be fallacious

    • paarsurrey

      “Biblical evidence? A book that is one of the most fallacious group of documents ever to find its way to print.”

      It is true that the NT Bible was not authored by Jesus; and he did not dictate it even. Gospels was authored by some anonymous scribes who were unaware that Jesus had migrated after the event of Crucifixion from Judea to India.

      Hence they could not record the correct events in the Gospel; nevertheless we see some quotes from Jesus ; that could consist of some Word Revealed on him from Yahweh whom he used to call as God-the-Father; he never mentioned of the Trinity, in my opinion.

      • Arkenaten

        India you are shitting me? Really? I saw a photograph of a tomb in Japan once. I am not kidding. And you say he is buried in India? Wow. Truly amazing.That would really upset the Christians because they all think he went to Heaven. Has anyone told them?
        Thanks for this. India. Who would have guessed.

    • Debilis

      Where in this post did I reference the Bible at all?
      I pointed out some distinct conceptual differences between different gods, and underlined that many materialistic atheists seem to be ignorant of the differences.

      None of this requires using the Bible as evidence. It only ever requires applying logic to the ideas being discussed.

      And, I must say, since you refuse even to claim that materialism is intellectually defensible, the tone of confidence here seems wildly misplaced.

      But, to settle your anticipation, no. I am not an atheist. I was briefly an atheist years ago.

      • Arkenaten

        The reason I mentioned the bible is because you mentioned Jesus and the only place you will find him is…and I know you will find this hard to believe..in the bible

        So you were once an atheist. I am impressed. Truly. So what happened to make you turn Christian? Did you receive a severe blow to the head?
        Or are you gay or did you do drugs and alcohol or have a pornography addiction?

        • Debilis

          I didn’t mention Jesus. Read over my post; the word “Jesus” doesn’t appear in it at any point.

          Beyond that, I’ll not stop you from the playground-style insults, but they really don’t contribute much to the discussion or do anything to make your position look intelligent.

          Rational people persuade one another with logic. Let’s leave ridicule and insults to those who can do no better than that.

        • Arkenaten

          Demeter, Jesus, Apollo, Horus, Zeus, Mithra, Yahweh, Tammuz, Ganesha, and Allah are only 10 of the thousands of gods recorded in history. An Atheist is not one that refuses to read religious doctrine; it is often one who reads too many.

          Er…want to run that by me one more time about not mentioning Jesus?
          Must i read it for you? Look at the first line…see it? Good…Now, you were saying?

        • paarsurrey

          Jesus is mentioned by Smalley; not by Debilis in the post; I have checked it.

        • Arkenaten

          I am aware.’He included it in the post and thus is trying to validate it.
          He is a christian. He cannot separate any argument from his belief in the divinity of Jesus.
          Why don’t you explain to him why Jesus was not divine?

        • paarsurrey

          I think the Christians now realize that Christianity being mythical and invented by Paul cannot be defended; like Atheism cannot be defended as it is a product of doubt and conjecture and is not based on any positive reasons or arguments. Atheists, as I understand, find it convenient to attack the foundation of Christianity and demolish it instead of proving Atheism positively to be correct or truthful; so they also should prefer attacking at the foundation of Atheism. This is my opinion; please correct me if I am wrong; others could also correct me likewise.

          I am all ears.

        • Arkenaten

          Atheism has nothing to defend against. it is NOT a belief in ANYTHING buy merely an absence of belief in gods. Period.
          I hope this clarifies what atheism really is once and for all.
          I hold your god in as much regard as I do Zeus, or any Hindu god which is no regard at all.

          All of it is man made.
          And yes, Christianity as preached by the character Paul is all nonsense. Even ‘Saul/Paul is a narrative construct. He was not a real individual. Research and you will discover.

        • paarsurrey

          It is not Jesus that Debilis mentioned in the post but Christianity; surely Debilis mentioned it.

        • paarsurrey

          That is quite OK; and befitting for one who believes a religion. One doesn’t have to ridicule and belittle in response.
          This is a sign that the Atheists are finished with good reasons and arguments.

        • paarsurrey

          @ Arkenaten

          It is not good to be personal to Debilis.

          Instead one should refute reasons and arguments that Debilis gave.

          Is the Atheism in one finished with reasons and arguments that one has started ridiculing and deriding; that adds no weight to Atheism?

          May be it is for this that Debilis has turned towards religion instead of lurking in doubt, aimlessly.

          One needs to be serious and sober.

        • Arkenaten

          Religion mocks itself, simply because of its fallacious claims. I don’t have to do anything, justify any claims or prove my point.
          The onus is all on you lot. And because you two believe in different gods, you each have a serious problem.
          I merely have to sit and watch. while you two bust a gut trying to get your point across, not only to me but to each other, which is going to be more difficult for you to convince each other than it ever will for you to convince me…and that is such good fun to tell you the truth.

        • paarsurrey

          “The onus is all on you lot.”
          These are all lame excuse of the Atheists. If they ask others of evidence; then if they counter; the Atheists are morally bound to provide the evidence.
          This is the humanist approach.

        • Arkenaten

          There is no evidence regarding the foundation that your or his religion is built upon. What do you no understand?

          Jesus is a narrative construct. Period.
          Mohammed was either delusional or a liar. Period.
          As Moses did not exist and the Koran mentions Moses and other patriarchs I’ll go with delusional for Islam.

          Christianity is built upon fraudulent claims, largely instigated by the likes of Constantine and Eusebius.
          There is not a single piece of contemporary evidence for Jesus.
          Islam merely ripped off Christianity.

        • paarsurrey

          I don’t agree with you.

          Jesus is not only in Bible but Jesus and Moses are both mentioned in Quran; with a slight difference. Jesus is mentioned as Jesus son of Mary (strictly speaking Isa son of Maryam) and Moses as Musa. Jesus is also mentioned in history books as Yuz Asaf most names change when they travel from one language to another. Atheists are totally wrong here.

          Please don’t misquote history.

        • Arkenaten

          Moises did not exist. Archaeology has demonstrated the fictitious nature of the Exodus. Accept it, get over it, and move along.
          Next, please..

        • Debilis

          @Arkenaten
          My advice for you is to re-read the post.
          It should be pretty clear that I’m not claiming anything about the Bible in particular, but simply pointing out that this is a bad argument.

          In fact, an atheist could agree to everything I’ve said here. Some atheists (Michael Ruse, for instance) do agree.

        • Arkenaten

          The point is if you weren’t a christian you wouldn’t even bother with such a post …
          Demonstrate the veracity of your silly religion and I’ll consider you have at least a margin of integrity to write objections to people like this.
          Otherwise you are merely peeing in the wind.
          In fact , I think I shall leave you to it. You are making a fine job of demonstrating the nonsense of your standpoint without my intervention.
          As I have said before, you are an idiot, and now you have a little Muslim playmate yo keep you company.Oh joy!
          Maybe I’ll pop by now and then and laugh at the interaction between the two of you.Cheers…
          Silly Person

        • Debilis

          Again this is mockery rather than actual arguments. I’m really trying hard to believe that you are capable of more than this. Please offer some cogent point.

          To address the only thing you do say, this is no different than my saying that, if you weren’t a non-Christian, you wouldn’t bother with your post. Can I challenge you to justify your rejection of Christianity before you make your point?

          Or, would you please notice that pointing out that atheistic arguments are completely false is one of the steps in justifying Christianity? That is, I’m already doing exactly what you’re asking.

          Do you agree that Smalley’s argument is ridiculous? If so, I’ll move on to the next step.

      • paarsurrey

        @ Debilis

        You did not mention Bible certainly.

        I think you are doing a good job defending Religion without a name; your points are valid and the Atheists have failed to counter them.

        Wish you a success! Pleas continue your good job.

    • paarsurrey

      “The divinely inspired (sic) bible that took how many years before a fixed canon was arrived at? And of course it wasn’t quite fixed even then was it?”

      It is true that before the canonization there were some forty gospels; out of which only four were selected randomly or without a merit on the others which were not included in the canon; that point should be clarified by Debilis.

      “Inspiration” is possible only on a person who receives Word of Revelation from the one true God;hence I don’t think that the scribes of the four Gospels were inspired. I think those who canonized they preached that the canonized Gospels were inspired only to add some credulity to the selection they made. I think Debilis will also explain it.

      • Arkenaten

        Excellent points, my friend. You get to play both sides of the field, I envy you. 🙂
        But don’t be surprised though if Debillis takes you task over your murdering, warmongering pedophile prophet in a moment.
        All’s fair in love an war … and religion, of course.
        But, once again, very good point about the fraudulent claims concerning the gospels.

        • paarsurrey

          I am an open mind. I love good reasoning and I don’t hate anybody. My intention is to bridge gaps between those who believe in a revealed religions and those who deny them. I think it is a humane and peaceful endeavor.
          Isn’t it?
          Thanks for the appreciation.

        • Arkenaten

          I agree with you. I think most religious people have very open minds
          .
          I am all for anything that demonstrates the fallibility of religious texts and those people that promote them, and i am quite happy to side with a Muslim while they trash the gospels.
          Be my guest. You may know stuff that I have missed and I am never one to shy away from learning something new, believe me.

          Where do you think the writer of Luke and Acts got much of the inspiration for his content? I know what I think, but i would be interested in your view.

    • paarsurrey

      “Lol….this is going to be so much fun, I am actually beginning to wonder if you are not, in fact, an atheist and are merely writing all this as a wind up.”

      Debilis writes nicely with good arguments; reason she prefers. Atheists are mostly emotional, in my opinion, with little or no reasoning; demanding others of the “evidence”; if countered they themselves provide none.

      People get bored from their such attitude.

  • paarsurrey

    Reblogged this on paarsurrey and commented:
    Smalley has generalized all dead and living religions; the polytheist and the monotheists together; not a sensible approach of him for sure.

    The title of your post is good and pertinent.

  • paarsurrey

    Quoting words from your post:

    “God of modern monotheistic book religion.”

    Quran identifies them as the people of the book; those who have a revealed book to follow distinct from those who don’t have a revealed book.

    What is your concept of “modern monotheistic religion”? Please

    • Debilis

      I was thinking chiefly of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.

      I wouldn’t rule out others, of course. I really only meant to contrast the modern western concept of religion (as being centered around a text and worshiping a transcendent God) with the ancient concept (in which gods were many and physical, and accurate beliefs were of lesser importance).

  • paarsurrey

    “Referencing dead religions as if this were a point in itself is, therefore, a mistake of someone who has read very little theology.”

    I agree with you here.

  • paarsurrey

    “the counter that secular views have many discredited relatives wouldn’t be far behind.”
    They are also many factions; some of them are not satisfied even that they should be called Atheists; they prefer themselves to be called Humanists or Skeptics/Agnostics; all negative and meaningless connotations, in my opinion.

  • paarsurrey

    “western monotheism”

    What is western monotheism?

    I think East is/was the citadel of monotheism; it did not originate with the West, in my opinion. Please elaborate this point for me.

    • Debilis

      The term is misleading, isn’t it?

      I meant west, as in “West of India”. I think I picked up this terminology from my history classes, but it may simply be a matter of having lived in Korea for several years.

      Either way, I agree that monotheism originates from what we often call the Middle East.

  • paarsurrey

    “No rational point against theism has been made.”
    I agree with you; Smalley has failed to make any good argument in it.

  • paarsurrey

    “Thus, the act of putting this on a top ten list serves mostly to highlight how little real material exists for Smalley to post in support of his materialistic atheism.”

    Like other Atheists/Humanist/Skeptics/Agnostics; they all attack religion and want to demolish a constructed building thinking that the rubble would make a building for them automatically.

    That will never happen; human conscious would reject the unnatural materialism/atheism.

  • Claim Knowledge and Run | paarsurrey

    […] July 24th, 2013 at 1:41 pm Reblogged this on paarsurrey and commented: Smalley has generalized all dead and living […]

What are your thoughts?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: