So, is God a myth, or what?

Soon after joining AOL, I stumbled upon the chatroom "God is a myth." I would often be disgusted and/or amused by what I saw going on in there. I enjoy good arguments, and once in a while I would see an argument in there that would almost qualify. Often times, I would hear the same tired arguments over and over again. Rarely, someone would say something interesting and surprising, so I suppose I kept going back hoping for this to happen.

Often times, someone would claim "this is not a debate room. This is a room for like minded people to gather" and apparently talk about anything other than the topic suggested by the title of the room. Christians are drawn to the room, and they will often quote the Bible, "preach," or try to convert the chat members. The chat members will then respond by being insulting, threatening to TOS, or calling in a guide. The guide will then boot the offending party. Sometimes, I have seen guides boot people who were fairly innocuous, and I don't think these people would have been booted from a "normal" chatroom.

Then, there's the odd phenomenon of the "fake fundie." A person will come into the chatroom, typing in caps, misspelling absurdly, saying things like "YALL AR GOIN 2 HEL" and crap like that, and we are supposed to believe this is a genuine person, when it is in fact a "fake fundie," a clown (literally) who is trying to make Christians look bad by "imitating" them.

In spite of all this, I keep going back. Perhaps it's like the child who picks up a rock to look at all the bugs and worms crawling underneath. Perhaps it's why the movie "The Cell" is selling so well, and how "Silence of the Lambs" won Oscars. Some sort of desire for the perverse, I don't know.

Also, I myself am not a Christian. I'm a deist, theist, pantheist, something or other, I don't know, I haven't figured it out yet. All I know for sure is that there's something there. And saying "I know for sure" bugs the heck out of those people, since they'll say "I don't know, therefore no one can know, therefore you don't know," which is not actually a logical argument, as the jump between "I don't know" to "no one can know" is invalid, at least, it requires more steps in between to get there. And they'll ask "how do you know?" and unfortunately, I can't tell them, since they are looking for a logical argument whereby I can transfer my knowledge to them, but the knowing is based on experience, which is non-transferrable. So they'll want me to describe the experience, and then attempt to invalidate the experience, or explain to me how the experience is not "proof" of God, but proof of something else.

So, these days, I mostly go into "God is a Myth" to just watch, and to occasionally throw in lines which might subtly suggest "Hey, maybe there actually is a God after all." But one day, I went in there and saw someone who was so rude, I just felt I had to do something. This inspired me to write the GIAM FAQ (after I calmed down.) I then went to a website which listed a lot of the "regs" (people who regularly visit a chatroom), and emailed the GIAM FAQ to everyone listed there. Unfortunatley, it was an old list. Also, I suppose I don't quite go to GIAM often enough to be recognized by most of the people there. I've decided to show you the GIAM FAQ with all the responses I've received, unedited, with one exception:

The GIAM FAQ

Q: Why do we never get any intelligent Christians in here?
A: They see a "dead Jew on a stick" joke and are so disgusted they leave without saying anything. Or, if they say anything along the lines of "Hey guys, what if, you know, just maybe there actually is a God?" they get "Preaching is a tossable offense. Go pimp your imaginary sky-fairy somewhere else." (An example of a less extreme response, with no expletives.) Or, they even get booted by a guide for being relatively innocuous (I have seen this happen.)

Q: Which god is real?
A: Whatever floats your boat.

Q: Why should I believe any religion over any other? They can't all be real.
A: People in Catholic countries see visions of the virgin Mary. People in more industrialized countries see UFOs. What if they were both looking at the same unknown It, but since they can't see It for what it really is, their perception is colored by their expectations? The theory here is that there is an objective It that both groups of people are looking at, and this is not just some strange, unexplained phenomenon of the human mind. (From Robert Anton Wilson's Cosmic Trigger.)
So, why can't God be similar to a UFO/BVM: an unknown It appearing to each according to cultural conditioning? (The implication of the question is "since they can't all be true, then none are true," which doesn't follow logically anyway.)

Q: Why do Christians keep coming in here?
A: You already know the answer to this. It is part of the belief of many Christians (not all, though perhaps most) that if you are not a Christian, then you are going to Hell. Thus, they see it as their duty to save you from this fate. They mean well, anyway. At least initially. Then, after receiving several insults, they may be provoked to respond in kind, having not quite mastered "turn the other cheek."

Q: Why are there fake fundies?
A: You got me. I guess they do it for their own amusement.

Q: Why are Christians so hypocritical?
A: Which is really asking (in many cases) "Why aren't Christians perfect?" Who is?

Q: Isn't the whole "I'm saved and you're going to Hell." idea just a false way for one person to feel superior to another?
A: Isn't the whole "I understand that reality is strictly material and you're suffering from an archaic superstition/delusion." idea just a false way for one person to feel superior to another?

Q: Why do you keep coming here?
A: I'm curious to see if anyone can come up with a good argument for the non-existence of God. Also, when we only interact with people who believe the same as we do, our minds stagnate. One Hollywood type in 1980 turns to another in puzzled shock: "I can't understand how Reagan won. Nobody I know voted for him."

In closing, I'd like to quote Robert Anton Wilson's Cosmic Trigger:

I DO NOT BELIEVE ANYTHING...

It seems to be a hangover of the medieval Catholic era that causes most people, even the educated, to think that everybody must "believe" something or other, and that if one is not a theist, one must be a dogmatic atheist...My own opinion is that belief is the death of intelligence. As soon as one believe in a doctrine of any sort, or assumes certitude, one stops thinking about that aspect of existence. The more certitude one assumes, the less there is left to think about, and a person sure of everything would never have any need to think about anything and might be considered clinically dead under current medical standards, where the absence of brain activity is taken to mean that life has ended.

I don't quite believe all that, but it's an interesting idea. For instance, if I believe god exists, but I don't know exactly what god is, this leaves room open for thought.

The responses:

Hey Cil,

I think that most regs go into the GIAM room to just be social. Most of us have gotten over the "oh brother, here's another xian come a knockin on our cyber door" feeling...well, the feeling may be there, but I think that the knee jerk reaction to it has gone down. Only to a few does it seem that they go into the room just to be confronted with this element. This happens on both sides, and I have no respect for either one.

I do like to engage in intelligent civil debates/topics - I find them stimulating. Socializing aside, that's one reason I like going in there....in hopes to find an offbeat topic. I don't go in as much now since I've been working more.

Nicole [nahash666]

How banal. Don't bother sending me any more email. Thank you. [Zappa now]

P*** off, d***head. Don't email me again. [Knightchik]

why on earth did you send me this??[Machined]

Just a few remarks,

I would not equate belief with certitude. This is exactly where the hardcore religious and I disagree. Even way back in Highschool when I was arguing with religious people (long before the internet even existed) I would would press in every way to get them to admit that they MIGHT be wrong. Very few ever would. I could never understand that. Certainty and I do not get along very well.

Yet I do have beliefs...but nearly all are accepted with the understanding that future modification is possible. This is a purely philosophical preference, much as you implied. Being certain about a thing removes all reasons for ever delving into the question again. So as a matter of principle I leave all questions open simply to disallow the brick wall which certainty generates from forming.

As for the Q&A, i persoanlly have NEVER met anyone who even claimed to want 'a good argument for the non-existence of god.' I would gladly talk to whomever said that. I am chock full of solid reasons to doubt there is a god.

thanks

todd[Kmisho]

Well, that just about covers it all, I suppose....but what of the non-Christian, non-athiest believers (such as myself) that frequent GIAM? I feel so.....void of representation here....lol. Take care, and thank you for the email....I found it rather amusing...I am sending it to a few of my theist friends (to ruffle their feathers a bit) and to my atheist friends (to show them that I still care).

Carpe Nocturnus, Raven [Raven Discord]

or.... if i don't believe gods exist, this leaves open room for thought as to the cause of things previously attributed to them [IOOIOOIOOI]

I have one question.... Who are you? [Delerium 74]

Who is this person and why is it sending me stuff? [Pippin Mc]

have no idea what this is about. In Zeus{LawyerKill]

Ok, just a few more questions...
1) Who are you?
2) Why was this mailed to me? (I haven't been in giam in a while)
3) Who are you calling imperfect? (someone didnt see my pics obviously ::grin::)
now that my daily rant is over...thank you, have a nice day :) [LdyDarq]

In a message dated 08/10/2000 1:59:21 PM Eastern Daylight Time, CILANTRON writes:

<< Oh dear, somehow, the previous email got truncated. Here is the complete text:

That's OK

The GIAM FAQ

Yes, I know that they say that in GIAM and I know that sometimes they get offensive too. I don't think they should be like that but it's their business either way. I never say those things though.

Q: Which god is real?
A: Whatever floats your boat.

Could you elaborate on that? I don't think any gods are real and I don't see what that answer has to do with the question. In fact I don't understand the answer at all.

What's a BVM? Also the point is not that none of them can be true because they all cannot be true. The point is there is no more of a reason to believe one of them then to believe in any other one of them. [BVM = Blessed Virgin Mary.]

Q: Why are there fake fundies?
A: You got me. I guess they do it for their own amusement.

Q: Why are Christians so hypocritical?
A: Which is really asking (in many cases) "Why aren't Christians perfect?" Who is?

Wrong. Asking why they are hypocritical is not the same as asking why they are not perfect. However, I never accused any group of people such as Christians of being hypocritical as a whole. I only accused individuals of it when they clearly were.

No, it is not the same thing. You are missing the whole point. They are not making themselves superior because they insist that their beliefs are true and ours are false. They are making themselves superior because they imply that they deserve an eternal reward for belonging to their religion and those who disagree with their beliefs deserve eternal punishment. That implies that they are better people for having the beliefs they have. We are not making ourselves superior because we are not saying we deserve an eternal reward for what we believe and that anyone who disagrees with us deserves eternal punishment. They are suggesting that or at least that that's the will of their god who is always right.

[My point here was that the one who says "I understand that reality...etc" feels intellectually superior to the "poor deluded little fools," whereas the one who believes in Hell feels morally superior. It's a different form of superiority, but superiority nonetheless.]

Well, I don't have any problems with anybody coming into the room and I never asked that. However, you did not answer the question anyway. Besides people have the right to interact with whomever they want to anyway. You may not tell them that they must interact with others too if they don't want to. Whether that's a good idea or not is another story. As far as it goes for the argument for the nonexistence of god or gods no such agrument is needed or would makes sense. First of all it has never been explained by anybody what a god is. God is just a meaningless word. Therefore there is nothing to disprove. One does not need to disprove something that has never been proven. Imagine if I would ask you to give me a good argument for the nonexistence of arogi. You would probably ask me what an Arogi. That's exactly my point. What a god? You cannot ask someone to give you an argument for something that has no meaning. You cannot ask someone to give you an argument for nonexistence anyway but especially of something that has no meaning. No one has ever given any credible argument for the existence of god or gods. The burden of proof lies on the one who is making the extraordinary claim not on the one who does not except it. It's like Voltaire said an extraordinary proof requires an extraordinary proof. No one has even explained what it is. Also since when does anyone need to present an argument for the nonexistence of something? have you ever seen anybody present an argument for the nonexistence of flying pink unicorns? Have you ever seen anybody present an argument for the nonexistence of little green men on the moon? Or of Vishnu? Or of Zeus? Can you present an argument for the nonexistence of those things or anything else? Can you imagine a situation where one would need to present an argument for something not existing? Why is this one god an exception to this? Also if anybody would present an argument for the nonexistence of god what would you expect that agrument to be? Just exactly what would you except as evidence or proof that god does not exist? There is no such thing as an evidence that something does not exist. The burden of proof is on the one who claims that something does exist. The only way that something can be proven not to exist is if it has contradictory qualities. For example you can be pretty sure that a square circle does not exist because it has contradictory qualities.

Would you consider it a good argument against the existence of god if I could show contradictory qualities in god? Well, if you would then I have good news because there are some contradictory qualities about god. If you wouldn't then what would you consider a good argument? An example of one contradictory quality about god is that he knows everything including the future. This si a contradictory quality because if god know all the future then there cannot be a free will and those who believe in god usually believe in free will too. I will give you an example of what I mean. Let's say that god knows that I will kill someone to morrow. This means that I will do it for sure because god already knows that I will do it, and if I will do it for sure then how can I have the free will to choose not to do it? On the other hand if I do have the free will to choose not to do it that mean it's possible that I won't do it. In that case I won't do it for sure so how can god know that I will do it if I might not?

Another example of contradictory quality of god is that he is able to do anything. I can give you many reasons why that is a contradictory quality but I will give you a classic one. If god is able to do anything can god create an object which he himself cannot destroy? If god can crate such an object that means there is something he cannot do because he cannot destroy such an object. On the other hand if god can always destroy anything that he creates then there is also something he cannot do because then he cannot create such an object. I could also ask can god create another god whom he cannot defeat or who is perfect just like him. It's the same thing.

Another contradictory quality about god is that he is perfectly good. this is in contradiction with his other qualities and the fact that there is evil in the world. If god I is all knowing, all powerful, and all god then there cannot be evil in the world, because since there is evil in the world one of the following 3 things must be true. Either god does not know about the evil in which case he cannot be all knowing, or he is not able to stop the evil in which case he cannot be all powerful, or he has no intention of stopping the evil and allows it to exist in which case he cannot be all good. Another contradictory quality is actually the primary argument for the existence of god and that is the idea that he is the creator of everything that exists AKA the universe. If god exists how could he be the creator of all that exists? If god exists that means he is among all that exists. How can god not be a part of the universe? Universe refers to everything that exists. To say that god is not part of the universe is to say that there is other existence besides everything that exists, and that is the contradiction. Besides if existence needs to be created then who created the existence of god? If god was never created that means that existence does not need to be created after all.

[First of all, I never said "you need to disprove the existence of God," I said "I'm curious to see if anyone can come up with a good argument for the non-existence of God." He makes a valid point that you can't really argue against the existence of something if you can't define what it is you are arguing against. Then he argues against the traditional Judeo-Christian concept of God. I'll argue back with a traditional Judeo-Christian counter-argument: evil exists because God has given us free will. Do you really want a God that acts like an over-protective parent which hovers over you every single moment of your life and prevents you from doing anything that could possibly harm you? When you were three and your parents tried to pull this on you (assuming they did) it drove you nuts, didn't it? As for God's "omniscience" preventing free will: if God is older than the universe, It would be very good at making educated guesses, and would appear to us to be omniscient. As for "omnipotence," perhaps God is not omnipotent, and basically established the rules which govern the universe, and doesn't violate these rules Itself (the deist Watchmaker argument.)]

I DO NOT BELIEVE ANYTHING...

I don't quite believe all that, but it's an interesting idea. For instance, if I believe god exists, but I don't know exactly what god is, this leaves room open for thought. >>

See what I mean about it not being explained what god even is? If you don't know what god is and nobody else does either then god is a meaningless word. it does not refer to anything. How could you believe in something if you don't know what it is that you believe in? I could say that I believe in Aroni. If you ask me what is an Aroni I will just say I don't know what is but I believe in it. You can say that god is the creator of the world but that does not explain what god is. It just says what god did. Besides, I already explained why it's a contradiction to say that all of existence was created by another existence. You can say that god is one who is all knowing, all powerful, all good, and everywhere. That still does not explain what god is just some of the qualities he has. Besides I already explained why those qualities are contradictory, except for the last one, but that one is contradictory as well. I am just not going to get into it. By the way, how did you find out my other screen name? [Wiz5340]

[I said "I don't know exactly what god is," I didn't say I had no beliefs, ideas, concepts, hypotheses on the subject. When I use the word "know" I mean to suggest something that is indisputable. So I can't go around saying "I know God is omniscient," for example.]

Hi,

I enjoyed your e-mail. Quite thought provoking. Thanks[BBugKill]

Cilantron...

Interesting. However, arguments against God are not possible, simply because "God" is not a term that seems to apply to anything known. In the total absense of any tangible existent..or even a knowable definition, or concept, to associate with this term...any such anti-god argument would basically NOT know what it was arguing against. The best anti-god argument one can make is..."What do you mean by the term, 'God'?" And, then expecting the reply to be understandable to human kind. If human reason cannot make sense of the reply, there is no reason to consider it. Reason forbids one from entertaining an arbitrary statement as being an equal to a rationally supported statement.

Example of an arbitrary statement: "An invisible blue Snorf, hiding under a rock on Mars, controls the sex life of all human beings."
Example of a supported statement: "Water is required to sustain human life."

It is simply epistemological suicide to make these two statements equal with each other..and to give both equal weight in one's mind. In fact, the purely arbitrary posit of "fact" should always be rejected out-of-hand.

Futhermore, if I stated that I believed in Snorf, but had no idea as to what a Snorf might be, what have I said? What is the subject of the stated "belief"? What is communicated by the statement?

If I said that I believed in "God", but had no idea as to what that was...what have I communicated? If I said that, "God is Love", but then denied that "God" was a human emotional state..and that the "love" of God was different in KIND from that of human love, but was then unable to inform anyone of exactly how it was different...What have I communicated? That some unknown, non-thing, is equal to the an emotional characteristic, about which, I know nothing about--save that it is totally alien in meaning from the love experienced by humankind...AND, which--to avoid confusion--had best be called something else.

Agnostics are either polite atheists--as they do not have a positive belief in any theological construct, or, they are confused epistemologically--having made the mistake of thinking arbitrary posits..are the equivalent of supported ones.

As for me, my position is simple. I haven't any idea of what is meant by the term, "god"..and I have never met any theist, who did. I have determined that for most, "god" is a personal emotional state, which they have come to call, "god". This emotional state is what they have founded their "god" upon..and it is this emotional state that is invoked by the term, "god", when heard or read. "God", I think, is more of an emotional trigger ...than a noun.

Sincerely,

Ision

[The idea that God is an emotional state is an intriguing idea. Then again, perhaps as love is the emotion you feel when someone you love is present, or when you think about someone you love, this God-emotion is the emotion that is felt when God is present or thought about.]

i enjoyed your reasoned essay.

as an orthodox jew however, i disagree with your hypothesis regarding belief. i know, with absolutely zero doubt, that G-d exists and gave his eternal immutable law at sinai.

nevertheless, i understand the christians who opine that they are the exclusive purveyors of the truth. religious beliefs generally fall in the realm of mutual exclusivities.

be well.[Asteist]

Thanks! Who are you, anyway? I used to "live" in GIAM until my husband made me get a job :-( Carol [CarolW13]

Do I know you?[David0270]

let me try this again. Who are you, why are you emailing me, and furthermore, why do I care?
skyknyt
Strange, because they are so frankly and hysterically insane -- like all dreams: a God who could make good children as easily as bad, yet preferred to make bad ones; who could have made every one of them happy, yet never made a single happy one; who made them prize their bitter life, yet stingily cut it short; who gave his angels eternal happiness unearned, yet required his other children to earn it; who gave his angels painless lives, yet cursed his other children with biting miseries and maladies of mind and body; who mouths justice and invented hell -- mouths mercy and invented hell -- mouths Golden Rules, and forgiveness multiplied by seventy times seven, and invented hell; who frowns upon crimes, yet commits them all; who created man without invitation, then tries to shuffle the responsibility for man's acts upon man, instead of honorably placing it where it belongs, upon himself; and finally, with altogether divine obtuseness, invites this poor, abused slave to worship him! -- Mark Twain, _The Mysterious Stranger_

[To Mark Twain, who, sadly, really is dead by now: all children are bad? All children are unhappy? I don't believe in Hell, myself.]

And you sent this to me because? [Purgyy]

and you're sending this to me because...?[Breednstud]

Back to me:

I've delayed responding to the responses to the FAQ because I've been too busy to give the topic of God the attention It deserves. I'm still not finished with this page, but I thought I'd at least get something on the net. It seems that to go any further, I'd have to come up with some kind of definition for God. This could take a while...

Home Back

Hosted by www.Geocities.ws