Ray Comfort, noted (you fill in the blank), has a Web site that he calls “Pull the Plug on Atheism.”
As is typical of many religious zealots, Comfort fills the articles on his site with lies and logical fallacies. One has to take but a moment or two to see how ridiculous his arguments are. His article, atheism's best kept secret, is a classic example of the nonsense that people like him make up to support their case. I would be far more appreciative of his attempts if they were actually inclusive of some semblance of honesty, but as can be expected, he grabs quotes out of context and applies his own brand of misleading logic to them and he misrepresents those whom he quotes.
An atheist is someone who believes that nothing made everything. He will of course deny that because it's an intellectual embarrassment, but if I say that I don’t believe that a builder built my house, then I am left with the insanity of believing that nothing built it. It just happened.
Let’s start with the obvious… An atheist is someone who does not believe the existence of deities.
The atheists I know aren’t addle-minded enough to suppose that nothing “made” something. But for Comfort, the use of this type of language sets the stage for his creation (or intelligent design) agenda. It is irrelevant to him whether what he is saying is true. But what better way to introduce his house builder analogy, which, if he told the truth about what atheists think, would prove to be a non sequitur.
Cornel University believe that nothing created everything. They said, ' . . . space and time both started at the Big Bang and therefore there was nothing before it.' [1] Scienceline.org said, 'Some physicists believe our universe was created by colliding with another, but Kaku [a theoretical physicist at City University of New York] says it also may have sprung from nothing . . . '
Here, in the first sentence of this paragraph, he misrepresents Cornell University. While the quote is an accurate one, it does not imply in any way that representatives at Cornell believe “nothing created everything.” It is only with a Comfort-able spin that such a thing could be inferred. Here is the entire text from Cornell:
"We can define the universe as everything there is, so in that case there is nothing outside of it. We also say that space and time both started at the Big Bang and therefore there was nothing before it.
"Another definition for the universe is the observable universe - which is the part of it that we can technically see. We cannot know what is outside of that (since we can't observe it), but we think that physics works the same everywhere and so we think that it should be very similar to the observable universe. We actually think that the universe might be infinite in extent, and so goes on forever, even though we can only see a finite part of it.
"We can speculate in meta-physics or in religion about what was before the Big Bang, but again, we cannot use science to tell anything about it as physics as we understand it breaks down at that point."
Imagine if I said that my latest book came from nothing. The text fell together in a coherent order, the page numbers fell in numerical order, it bound itself, the cover designed itself, and then out of nowhere the title, You Can Lead an Atheist to Evidence, But You Can’t Make Him Think appeared. There was no author, no printer, and no publisher. What sort of crazy person would you think I was if I said that nothing created the book? Why then would anyone give any credibility to an atheist? So the next time you hear the word “atheist” and the word “intelligent” in the same sentence, you will know better.
To be snarky for a moment, I could say that his book most likely came from nothing, considering how fallacious most of his contentions are. But, that would be inaccurate. His book obviously came from his mind and even the most deluded mind is still a mind.
Finally, I find it laughable at best for him to call out atheists as less than credible, especially in light of his intentional misrepresentations in this article.
Comments
I can't stand Ray Comfort. He and his trusty sidekick Mike Seaver are two of the most absurd apologists I've ever seen (they're neck-and-neck with Kent Hovind). At the same time, though, I suppose you've got to appreciate his particular variety of stupid because it's so easy to see. His logical fallacies & foolish statements are plain as day, unlike the higher-calibur apologetics of William Lane Craig which can take several hours of consideration before you can find where the BS is hidden.
"... if I say that I don’t believe that a builder built my house, then I am left with the insanity of believing that nothing built it. It just happened."
Um ... for hundreds of thousands of years our ancestors lived in houses that "just happened." We call them "caves." As usual, Comfort and his ilk confuse function with intent.
Cornell is quoted: "We can speculate in meta-physics or in religion about what was before the Big Bang, but again, we cannot use science to tell anything about it as physics as we understand it breaks down at that point."
Maybe science and physics can be used to advance any theory..
“What you can show using physics forces this universe to continue to exist. As long as you're using general relativity and quantum mechanics, you are forced to conclude God exists,”- Tulane University professor Frank Tipler.
If so, then does the "God fearing" Christian really need to be more credulous than the Atheist who's beliefs are built upon the precarious and limited scope of human intellect?
David... just to clarify... the ONLY thing that defines 'atheists' is the fact that they do NOT BELIEVE 'theists' STORIES about invisible, magical, all-powerful, supernatural sky-fairies (gods). That is IT... that is ALL. There is no such thing as atheist beliefs... faith... dogma... agenda... philosophy... etc. The word is simply descriptive of people who are not stupid and gullible enough that they can be convinced... with NO EVIDENCE... that invisible, magical, all-powerful, supernatural sky-fairies are a necessary element in reasonable explanations for the nature of existence and reality.
You would do well to consider the function that has been served by 'god' throughout history... and that is as a 'place-holder' for KNOWLEDGE, and provided the ILLUSION of knowledge. You might also take note that over and over again... as the ILLUSION of knowledge got replaced with ACTUAL knowledge... 'god' got kicked to the curb.
You glorify and sanctify ignorance and credulity... and there's no future in that.
DuckPhup..If you weren't so quick to dismiss the idea of a God as a "magical sky-fairy" and convince yourself that people of faith are just "stupid and gullible", then maybe you could consider my first comment a bit more objectively.
Thank you though, for clarifying the definition of atheism. I tend to forget that there is no orthodoxy in atheism and thus no end to the possible variations that may claim the name "atheism"....with that being said, would I be wrong to "believe" that many atheist believe..or at least act as they believe..that all the answers they need in life come from science?? I think they do...But as brilliant and helpfull the natural sciences are to human knowledge, they are incompetent to deal with the more complex questions we humans face throughout life. And this is not me being being sentimental, but quite realistic. Perhaps by HONESTLY and PRAGMATICALLY examining your own existance in this universe and what you believe to be TRUTH, you may find that science is short on ACTUAL knowledge and atheism to be a weak foundation for the human life.
So, please. If you respond to my comments, do so with candor and humility. As a "stupid and gullible" Christian, I am simply attempting to put my ideas out there and enjoy hearing an alternative point of view.
As just a quick answer to your question, David - no, not all atheists believe that all answers in life can come from science. Just as not all theists are experts in creationism & intelligent design theories, there are some atheists that are quite science-illiterate. Atheists don't believe in gods; what they do believe in is another story.
You are quite right to say that there is "no end to the possible variations that may claim the name 'atheism'." The potential for varying beliefs is as real in atheism as it is in theism. You could have a person who believes in UFOs, the Loch Ness Monster, ghosts & psychic house pets, but as long as their beliefs don't include supernatural gods they are technically atheists.
I couldn't find anywhere to comment on this gent's site. I suppose that's intentional.
If he's going to write hate speech he should have the chutzpah to allow comments.
since when was freedom of speech hate speech? Atheists bash Christians all the time. Christians are called, dumb, ignorant, stupid, un-intelligent...simply because we believe that an infinite and Holy God created everything in the universe. Even people like us, who have the freedom to simply spit in His face and say He does not exist.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!