A Dumb Proof for God

Here is Bob Dutko’s “proof” that a creator-god exists.

1)  Either God exists or He doesn’t.

2)  If he doesn’t, then the only thing we’re left with are the Laws of Physics to describe the beginning of the universe.

3)  The Laws of Physics don’t allow for matter to be created from nothing.  That would break the first Law of Thermodynamics.

4)  Therefore, God must exist.

He has a second proof that says why this god is actually the Christian God.  The proof is that in the Bible, Jesus says he is the one true God.  Period.  Apparently no other god was smart enough to proclaim themselves the one true god.

And he really sounds so sincere when he doesn’t understand why atheists don’t get it.  He truly claims that he’s proven God by using SCIENCE and LOGIC, and it’s so simple!

There are two issues I have with his proof.

The first is that I don’t believe anyone’s opinion on physics, biology, astrophysics, geology, etc, except for people who have actually studies and trained in the those fields.  A huge amount of Christian apologists will lay out what sounds like real facts from all those areas of study.  I dismiss them out of hand, and you should too.  At best, they’ll cherry pick data to support their claims (weird radiometric dating instances, for example).  Or worse, they’ll present a falsehood as fact.  In this instance:  The law of conservation of energy, which Bob is referring to, only applies to CLOSED systems.  So it doesn’t apply to the creation of the universe (if, indeed, the universe isn’t eternal and was created).

Now if Bob could demonstrate that matter or energy was actually created or destroyed WITHIN the confines of the universe, then we’d have something to talk about.

The second thing I note is that I really get the sense that theists come from a position of absolutes.  There is such a thing as absolute good and absolute evil.  Things are very black and white.  And I think they project these notions onto the secular world where they may not fit.

What I don’t think he’s understanding is that scientific stuff, even “laws” and “theories”, are flexible.  They are merely descriptors of the universe around us, and can (and should!) change if they aren’t doing an adequate job of describing reality.  If we did find something that “broke” the laws of physics, that doesn’t mean all of physics is now meaningless.  It just means we need to refine our understand and description of reality.  And clearly we’re doing this as we discover new things at the fringes of our understanding of the universe (quantum physics, notably). 

Science works.  It is the very best way of refining our understating of reality.  In fact, if someone proposed a new way of ascertaining reality, we’d use the scientific method to figure out if it was actually better or not!

If I was the Devil

You have to admit... it makes some sense.

Bill Nye and Evolution

I'm a little surprised by the shortsightedness of Bill Nye in this video.  He says:

And I say to the grownups, if you want to deny evolution and live in your world, in your world that’s completely inconsistent with everything we observe in the universe, that’s fine, but don’t make your kids do it because we need them. We need scientifically literate voters and taxpayers for the future. We need people that can — we need engineers that can build stuff, solve problems.

What he (apparently) doesn't realize is that parents teach their children what they think is the truth.  To ask a parent who truly believes in the creation story to deny it and not teach their kids the same thing is ridiculous.  And this, of course, is why some parents are so up in arms about evolution being taught in schools.

I mean, I don't believe in the Greek mythological creation story, so of course I'd be pissed if were taught as fact in school.

We, as a society, need to somehow do a better job at spreading the word that evolution is actually factually true.  And that doesn't mean just shouting it louder.  That means demonstrating it in a way that people can really understand, and change some minds.

Bob Dutko and Yoga

Recently I was listening to Bob Dutko on my drive home.  He’s on a local Christian radio station from at 5pm, so I frequently hear him on my drive home.

He’s a trip.  He’s a young earth creationist who takes a very literal approach to the Bible.  He believes in angels (and angles) and demonic forces.  He’s very concerned about false prophets, and people following a “false Jesus”.    Earth is 6000 years old.  Dinosaurs and man lived together.  Noah’s ark.  What’s so fascinating, though, is that his show is called “Defending the Truth”, and he argues his viewpoints from (in his words), a logical and rational and scientific point of view.  He’s got no problem using the second Law of Thermodynamics to “prove” that God exists. 

On top of all that, he has this deliciously smarmy and smug attitude which I love to hate.  He’s a brilliant debater, and frequently has people with opposing points of view on his show (either outright atheists, or theists who have a different interpretation of things than he does).

I generally find the debates about various interpretations of religious dogma somewhat boring.  It’s kind of like listening to people argue about the length of unicorn horns, and using various sources of mythology to back up their claims.  But yesterday, he had a female minister on (already contentious) who had written a book on practicing yoga in a Christian way.  He let his guest begin by talking about yoga, and the slow stretching and breathing, and how that really gets your mind and body into a place where you are relaxed and ready to meditate and pray.

He then steered the conversation towards the Hindu roots of yoga, and was really concerned that people who do it were falling prey to “Eastern religious mysticism”.  His guest obviously disagreed.  He then asked if yoga was good for people… not Christian yoga, but normal, traditional yoga.  Her response was “Well, the Hindu’s think so!”  This was impossible for him to swallow, and he went into a speech how Jesus was very clear that the only people who reach the Father come through him, etc.  They cut to commercial, and the announcer said “Coming up, Bob’s guest claims that there are many paths to heaven!”  I literally laughed out loud in my car, knowing that this was going to drive Bob apeshit.  It did, and he went into his standard railing against moral relativism and universalism, and once again said that there is only one true path to Heaven, and so on.  The guest simply said “Well, you and I disagree on that theology.”  Good stuff.

If you ever happen to be talking to Bob, mention that you think people get into heaven based on the kind of life they lead, and that even atheists or aboriginal Africans will go to heaven if they are good people, and watch him lose his shit.

Bears in the Bible

2 Kings 2:23-24, “Then he went up from there to Bethel; and as he was going up by the way, young lads came out from the city and mocked him and said to him, “Go up, you baldhead; go up, you baldhead!” 24 When he looked behind him and saw them, he cursed them in the name of the LORD. Then two female bears came out of the woods and tore up forty-two lads of their number.”

This is a favorite Bible verse of skeptics.  It sounds very clear on the surface, doesn't it?  Elisha was traveling to Bethel, and mocked and teased by some young people.  He then curses them, and a couple bears show up and tear them apart.

Awesome.

What makes for really interesting reading is how this passage is justified. 

To read it one way, using varying translations and possible cultural and contextual clues, this was a mob of angry young men (upwards of 30 years old) who were casting death threats on Elisha.  So the bears were sent as a defensive measure against a certain attack.

Other commentaries claim that when Elisha "saw" the children, he saw they were totally wicked, and would grow up to be evil, and that somehow justifies their destruction.  Killing children before they grow up to be evil adults.

One article even goes on to say how Satan loves to attack the word of God, and "isn't it sad" when some of those attacks come from inside the church itself.  Reading between the lines:  "Don't question it!"

It's an interesting verse, for sure.  If you have already presupposed the nature of God as kind and loving and just, then it's necessary to do some mental gyrations to incorporate the brutal slaying of young people into that mindset.

In my own reading, I find it interesting that he was traveling to Bethel and while he was on the way, he was mocked.  Its important that he was in transit, and not at his destination.  In the various translations that I spot checked, he always "turned back" or "turned around" before cursing them.  Meaning, he was beyond them on his travel from A to B.  From a literal reading, they weren't blocking his path or intimidating him.  They were behind him.  To that end, it really feels more like an act of vengeance for mocking him, or God, or whatever.

Of course, I don't believe the event actually happened.  But it's an interesting little study.

Poor Herman Cain

Poor Herman Cain.  I remember feeling bad for the guy at the time.

Unsure of whether he should run for president:

“I prayed and prayed and prayed,” the former Godfather’s Pizza CEO said of his decision to run for president. “I’m a man of faith, I had to do a lot of praying for this one, more praying than I’d ever done before in my life. And when I finally realized that it was God saying that this is what I needed to do, I was like Moses: ‘You’ve got the wrong man, Lord. Are you sure?’”

Once the decision was made, Cain said, “I did not look back.”

Well, it should be noted that he didn’t look back until his alleged sexual misconduct and affairs were made public.  And he prayed about the decision to suspend his campaign, too.

God convinced Cain to run for the presidency, presumably with the knowledge that his philandering would come to light.  The only conclusion that we can draw from this is that God was teaching Cain some sort of lesson in humility.  I mean, is there any other possibility?  I don’t think it was in God’s plan for Cain to actually win the election, and Cain somehow subverted those plans with his human fallibility.

I’m confused by this course of action.  I guess I can’t say exactly why, but it strikes me as kind of petty or childish to trick someone into running for president, only to publically humiliate them later.  It’s like Lucy pulling the ball away from Charlie Brown.  The next time Herman Cain prays for something, and receives an answer for those prayers, he may think twice about actually acting on it.

Pascal's Wager

Pascal’s wager, in brief, says that it’s logical and rational to believe in God.  It is commonly used as an argument to convince someone that they are better off believing in God than not.

1)  God either exists, or he doesn’t.

2)  You can either choose to believe, or not.

Depending on what you choose, and whether God exists, there are some varying possible outcomes. 

If God doesn’t exist, then your choice doesn’t matter and nothing happens when you die.

If God does exist, and you are a believer, then you are rewarded with and infinite blissful afterlife.

If God does exist and you are NOT a believer, then you are punished with infinite suffering.

If you believe, than at worse, nothing bad happens.  At best, you win everything.  If you don’t believe, at best nothing good happens.  At worst, you get infinite punishment.

Nice.

There are some very basic problems with this.

First, “God exists or doesn’t” is actually shorthand for:  “The Christian God exists and is as described in the Bible, and no other gods exist”.  Clearly, there isn’t a direct opposite to that compound statement.  Either the Christian God doesn’t exist (but other gods do), or he does exist but isn’t necessarily as described in the Bible, or he is one of many gods that exist.

Suppose God isn’t as he’s described in the Bible?  Suppose he rewards skeptical thinking and rationality, rather than faith and obedience in the face of shoddy evidence?  Suppose the Bible was influenced by Satan himself as a trick to lead the gullible astray?  These are certainly in the realm of possibility.

Second is the notion that we can choose our beliefs.  This is a big one, because I’m not sure what it would take for me to actually believe that the Bible was true.  Literally and figuratively, it might take a miracle.  I suppose I could choose to pray, go to church (which one?!), and live a pious life, but I’m not sure I could honestly admit that I Believed.  If God designed me, then he designed my great big brain and wired skepticism into it.  And as a god, he should have KNOWN that ancient texts written in dead languages with vague interpretations isn’t the best way to attract followers.  Therefore, I can only conclude that he made things vague on purpose, and is purposefully weeding out skeptics like myself.  I find that to go against the grain of the message of Christianity as I’ve read it.

Finally, there is a hidden cost in the “believe in God when no gods exist” option that isn’t mentioned in the wager, which is how a person lives their life.  If Believers turn out to be wrong, it’s very possible that they have wasted a huge amount of their lives.  If their religious beliefs restrict them from certain foods or activities, then they are possibly denied a great deal of pleasure.  Hours spent in church could have been spent more constructively.  And maybe most importantly, it would be a shame if someone spent their lives implicitly or explicitly waging a war against things like homosexuality, evolution, etc, only to find out their Biblical argument didn’t hold any water.

I like to think that if there is a god, and he is who he says he is, then he knows me, and he knows my thinking.  The happy, fuzzy Christians say that “Jesus loves you no matter what”.  I hope that’s true.  If it somehow comes to pass that I find myself in the hot-seat of the afterlife, at least I can hold my head high and say “Look, man… I did the best I could with what you gave me to work with.”  And if that’s not enough to save me, then I guess I’ll hope that Satan appreciates skeptics and rational thinkers.