Comment by Jake W. Andrews on February 15, 2011 at 4:48pm

Is this all the theists have anymore? Weak spinoffs to 'Pascal's Wager' ? Only a theist can think the smallest probability translates to complete certainty. Isn't it humorous that all the theists positions were completely at odds with each other, yet the skeptics/atheists had the more consistent position regarding afterlife? At one point the Imam/broadcaster was calling into question the bishop's faith! hilarious. Some points I want to highlight from the above video's theist arguments:

 

1.) bodies die and soul (no definition) lives forever, therefore there is life afterdeath (logical fallacy)

2.) only the clever convert to islam?

3.) evidence is only defined as personal proof, nothing involving a double blind test, or repeatable tests, and that collection of evidence is based on some other person's feelings.

4.) scripture can be trusted source from god only if tested (How do we test it?)

5.) faith/proof are mutually exclusive.

6.) the world is complex, so there must a creator

7.) this world is a waiting room for the afterlife

8.) souls live forever.

9.) pascals wager courtesy of the I-mom

 

The recap of all the points made is a sad reflection of the 'Open' discourse religion has brought onto itself. In what other contexts would these arguments be justifiable? The world is complex, therefore the tooth-fairy does exist? What about this, you may not believe in the tooth-fairy, but what would you lose if you didn't believe? The moderator did a horrible job of putting the people to ask to defend their position. This seems to be a reoccurring problem with the media, they seem to think unbiased means being a pushover and not being able to criticize any of the viewpoints if they are illogical. Not once did we hear that 'irrefutable' evidence for an afterlife, and not once did any one make a reasonable argument (mostly from pathos).So after hundreds of years of debunking the arguments, people still resort to scare tactics and the same old debunked arguments and the only appropriate argument from a theist I heard was, "I dont know/care", this is a start atleast.

Comment by Steve M on February 15, 2011 at 5:32pm

This stuff infuriates me. The old " every idea is equal" when it comes to peoples perception of the universe.

It's like alchemy is just as valid as chemistry or astrology should be taught along side of astronomy. That seems obviously silly but there are equally ridiculous things that come close to representing discussions like this like when people insist that homeopathy is valid or that power lines cause cancer. When it comes to spirituality or peoples health  any bullshit idea must be treated with respect . What a bunch of immature crap. I especially like the smug jewish woman who simply asserts, as many fundementalist christians do, that "I do not understand nor do I wish to understand the nature of the universe therefore my hypothesis  is most assuredly correct". What horseshit!

Comment by Eoganacht on February 16, 2011 at 1:34am

"an overwelming body of personal evidence" - aka "it's true to me"

Only the skeptic made any sense and no body brought any evidence save personal stories and blind faith statements. The priest is the only rational religious person.

Comment by Shaun Saunders on February 21, 2011 at 2:03pm
Watching this stuff drives me insane, the arguements are so weak but given air time..

Comment

You need to be a member of Think Atheist to add comments!

Join Think Atheist

Atheist Sites

Blog Posts

Rounding Up?

Posted by Carol Foley on November 20, 2014 at 3:17am 2 Comments

Services we love!

We are in love with our Amazon

Book Store!

Gadget Nerd? Check out Giz Gad!

Advertise with ThinkAtheist.com

In need a of a professional web site? Check out the good folks at Clear Space Media

© 2014   Created by umar.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service