Ray Comfort has stated on his blog that atheists are like “broken records” repeating the same questions time and again even when answered satisfactorily (if only in the mind of the believer). His main complaint is the “But what created God?” argument in response to the Christian claim that the appearance of design demands a designer.
I understand Comfort’s frustration. It’s exactly the same for the non-believer. We consistently hear the same claims from “True Believers” time and time again even though they’ve been fully refuted an untold number of times in the past. Take for example the following often-repeated mantra from Comfort’s blog:
“An atheist is someone who believes that nothing made everything.”
Perhaps Comfort is attempting to prove a point by obnoxiously repeating a claim and ignoring all sound and reasonable refutations of that claim, but I doubt it. Comfort has given no indications at all that he understands logic and reason when it’s not hopelessly twisted and tangled. Time and again he has been given sound, logical responses to this nonsensical definition of atheist, and he continues to come back with the same reply: “If you don’t believe that nothing created everything, please describe the something which you believe created everything”. Let’s break this thing down for ol’ Ray.
Atheism indicates a lack of belief. There is no belief involved in atheism. Therefore an atheist is one who fits the description of lacking belief in any deity or deities. Atheists may believe many things, but not one of them can be described by the definition of atheist. In that respect alone, Comfort’s definition of atheist is incorrect.
Many people have attempted to correct Comfort on his blog, but he continually uses disingenuous tactics to circle back around to the “Please describe the something which you believe created everything” ploy. One of those tactics is the duality which he no doubt knows is present in the phrase “nothing created everything”. To the atheist, because the term “created” implies intelligent design and therefore requires the elusive intelligent designer, the phrase means that the universe was not “created” or designed, but not necessarily that there is no first cause. To the “True Believer”, the phrase means that a symbolic “nothing” created everything. They pre-suppose design into the universe and therefore it requires a designer. If their god didn’t do it, then the “nothing” did and they “know” that it is impossible for something to come from nothing (shh…nobody mention quantum physics). Therefore, atheists are fools because we believe that “nothing created everything”! At least that’s what Comfort intends to convince the “True Believer”.
Comfort continues to badger any who dare defy his “clear definition” of atheist and demands that they declare what “something” it is which they believe “created” everything. Well Ray, here’s the thing. Science postulates possibilities. It doesn’t deal with immovable absolutes, especially in the field of cosmology. When newer, better evidence comes along to refute existing theories, those theories are modified or replaced. When Science doesn’t know the answer, it admits that it doesn’t know and keeps looking for possibilities. Science would readily accept any empirical evidence to support the theory of “God” should any ever surface. Science is far from the proud and arrogant thing that the “True Believer” would paint it to be.
Christianity on the other hand posits only one thing and will not be moved despite a profound lack of supporting evidence. Christianity claims absolute knowledge of the one true “God” and “his plan”. They don’t just believe, they “know”. Despite the self-deprecation demanded of followers by Christian dogma, there is ultimately no humility in Christianity, but the utmost in pride and arrogance.
Socrates said that true knowledge is knowing that you know nothing. Given Christianity's track record, in my book, that makes the “True Believer” the fool.