Local Atheist Demands Evidence For God, Besides Entire Universe

Screen Shot 2018-01-15 at 3.31.11 PM.png

Image & article credit: The Babylon Bee

AUSTIN, TX—Inspired by his latest read-through of Letter to a Christian Nation, which he re-reads religiously, local atheist Tommy Peterson has published a Facebook post demanding that God show him proof of His existence, “besides all the material things that could not have existed without an ultimate cause,” sources confirmed Wednesday.

“Without pointing to the millions of blatantly obvious pieces of evidence for His existence all around us, please demonstrate logically how there is some all-powerful God out there,” Peterson wrote. “I want to be convinced. Just point to one thing—just one thing—that proves there is a Creator, without talking about creation at all.”

“I’m waiting,” he added, confidently.

When one of Peterson’s friends pointed out that the universe was quite obviously designed, rather than having arbitrarily sprung up from nothing, and that Peterson’s own ability to use logic suggested there was a logical mind behind everything that exists, Peterson reportedly scoffed and cracked his knuckles, ready with a reply.

“See, once again, fundie, you can’t manage to prove God’s existence without resorting to the laughable argument of pointing at all the things that were definitely created by an intelligent being. I feel sorry for you. Next!”

At publishing time, Peterson’s challenge to prove the existence of God without using the clues He had left to be clearly perceived by anyone on earth was still standing.


69 responses to “Local Atheist Demands Evidence For God, Besides Entire Universe

  1. >“Without pointing to the millions of blatantly obvious pieces of evidence for His existence all around us ..”
    So, unlike other atheists that I have met on the web, he admits that there is evidence for the existence of God.

  2. Is the universe coherent? If it is, is religion like the Christian one a coherent account of the universes organization?
    Christians have always said a lot of stupid stuff, and if the universe was that stupid then we would all be destroyed!

  3. Something can’t come from nothing because nothing is required for there to be nothing. Something existing would then be a change from there being nothing to there being something, but if there is nothing, there is nothing that can change. And if something from nothing were possible then so many different types of things would have always been spontaneously existing, some of them doing or causing the same things possibly. Likewise with things that are the same and any amount of them potentially doing and causing different things, since if a cause is unnecessary, there is nothing to prevent this being possible. The requirements for science, then, would not exist, since nothing would have to be a certain way to cause a specific result from it.
    Particles coming in and out of empty space can’t be evidence for something from nothing, because empty space is still space which is still something, or else there would be nothing for those particles to exist in. Empty space and vacuums have a minimal amount of energy in them to produce these particles, have dimensions that can bend and be measured, and the amount of energy, that obviously can also be measured, can change. This is all only possible because of how already existing physics make it so, so not only can nothing not be seen or tested to verify the possibility of it, but nothing is by definition what does not exist, so there being nothing is as self contradictory as there being no such thing as truth.
    Nothing can have a beginningless infinite past because it would take an infinite amount of time for anything to happen then, so nothing ever would because there never would be that much time. So for anything to exist there has to be something or someone to cause them. The only type of entity that could cause the first beginning would have to be independent of time and space.

  4. Would just one Atheist, astrophysicist, biologist, evolutionist, tell me/explain to me the origin of the constituent matter that formed the Universe? My Lord declares that what we see emanates from the unseen-spiritual World. With all of our research, documentation, NASA, the greatest minds that have very lived other than Jesus Christ Himself…please explain the origin of the matter that formed the Universe, life…time? Twitter: @RickeyDale07

    • It’s well understood that the universe is symmetrical as a totality
      THis means that if you ad up all the positive and negative energy the sum is zero.
      Nothing is the ground state of the universe and creation was spontaneous and not at all like the religions describe

      • The “religious” don’t describe it, the scientists can’t describe it, only my Lord Jesus Christ has articulated it. You have a choice, believe His Words or deny…your Eternity wholly depends on your choice.

        • Jesus did not even exist, the story is a Roman fabrication! Look up the Egyptian story of Horus, Horus was the original Jesus! Good luck with your childhood brainwashing!

              • “[Consider] the instance of Osiris, commonly cited by mythicist as a pagan parallel to Jesus. Osiris was an Egyptian god about who a good deal was written in the ancient world. We have texts discussion Osiris that span a thousand years. None was as influential or as well known as the account of the famous philosopher and religion scholar of the second Christian century, Plutarch, in his work Isis and Osiris. According to the myths, Osiris was murdered and his body was dismembered and scattered. But his wife, Isis, went on a search to recover and reassemble them, leading to Osiris’ rejuvenation. The key point to stress, however, is that Osiris does not—decidedly does not—return to life. Instead he becomes the powerful ruler of the underworld. And so for Osiris there is not rising from the dead.

                “[Jonathan Z.] Smith maintains that the entire tradition about Osiris may derive from the processes of mummification in Egypt, where bodies were prepared for ongoing life in the realm of the dead (not as resuscitated corpses here on earth). And so Smith draws the conclusion, ‘In no sense can the dramatic myth of his death and reanimation be harmonized to the pattern of dying and rising gods.’ The same can be said, in Smith’s view, of all the other divine beings often pointed to as pagan forerunners of Jesus. Some die but don’t return; some disappear without dying and do return; but none of them die and return.

                “Jonathan Z. Smith’s well-documented views have made a large impact on scholarship. A second article, by Mark S. Smith, has been equally informative. Mark Smith is a scholar of the ancient Near East gods and Hebrew Bible who also opposes any notion of dying and rising gods in the ancient world. Mark Smith makes the compelling argument that when [Sir James George] Frazer devised his theory about dying and rising gods, he was heavily influenced by his understanding of Christianity and Christian claims about Christ. But when one looks at the actual data about the pagan deities, without the lenses provided by later Christian views, there is nothing to make one consider them as gods who die and rise again. Smith shows why such views are deeply problematic for Osiris, Dumuzi, Melqart, Heracles, Adonis and Baal.

                “According to Smith, the methodological problem that afflicted Frazer was that he took data about various divine beings, spanning more than a millennium, from a wide range of cultures, and smashed the data all together into a synthesis that never existed. This would be like taking views of Jesus from a French monk of the twelfth century, a Calvinist of the seventeenth century, a Mormon of the late nineteenth century, and a Pentecostal preacher of today, combining them all together into one overall picture and saying, “That’s who Jesus was understood to be.” We would never do that with Jesus. Why should we do it with Osiris, Heracles, or Baal? Moreover, Smith emphasizes, a good deal of our information about these other gods comes from sources that date from a period after the rise of Christianity, writers who were themselves influenced by the Christian views of Jesus and ‘who often received their information second-hand.’ In other words, they probably do not tell us what pagans themselves, before Christianity, were saying about the gods they worshiped.

                “The majority of scholars agree with the views of Smith and Smith: there is not unambiguous evidence that any pagans prior to Christianity believed in dying and rising gods, let alone that it was a widespread view held by lots of pagans in lots of times and places.” (Bart Ehrman, Did Jesus Exist?, 228-230.) found at https://atheistforums.org/thread-36264.html

              • And one site defends Jesus because dec 25 is not mentioned in the bible
                Apparently the bible has been falsified and you don’t care
                I got no time to spend explaining shit to you
                Liners lie and some people believe anything
                Be a sheep be a sheep be a dumb old sheep

              • >Apparently the bible has been falsified and you don’t care

                There is NO evidence that the Bible has been falsified and I would care if it had been.

                You can’t explain what you do not know. I did not swear in any of my posts to you. You had to swear to me because you know that you have lost the argument.

              • >Be a sheep be a sheep be a dumb old sheep

                I went to grad school on the subject and am a published author in a scholarly refereed journal.

              • >Your just a brain dead yank!

                Yank, yes. Brain dead, no.

                >Dumb enough to think your paper means anything!

                I’ve killed about two-three dozen websites with my works. Try looking up “Project Reason” and ask yourself, why it can’t be found? (hint: they got tired of being skewered for stealing the graphics they had, from a Christian–plus many other errors.)

              • I’m not surprised that you are totally and completely unaware of how far you are in over your head. Isaac Asimov predicted people like you: “There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that ‘my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.”

  5. As an atheist/agnostic, I would accept the same quality of evidence for the existence of Yahweh/the resurrected Jesus that most Christians would demand to believe in the existence of the Loch Ness Monster, the Abominable Snow Man, or Big Foot. No more. No less.”

      • I guess I wasn’t clear: “I would accept the same quality of evidence for the existence of the Christian god—Yahweh/the RESURRECTED JESUS—”

        I believe there is good evidence for the historicity of Jesus the man. That is why I believe that Jesus was a real historical person. No, I’m asking for evidence for the superhero Jesus, the resurrected god whose corpse came back to life, exited his sealed tomb, teleported between cities, levitated into the clouds, and now sits on a golden throne somewhere in outer space as Almighty Ruler of the Cosmos.

    • So do I understand you correctly: “I know in my heart that Jesus was God, Creator of Heaven and Earth, all-powerful and perfect. Therefore it is impossible he was mistaken.”

    • No, I’m not assuming Jesus was mistaken. I am simply trying to show that being sincerely mistaken is another possible explanation for Jesus’ belief that he was the messiah, the Son of God. “Liar, lunatic, or Lord” do not cover all the possibilities for the early Christian belief that Jesus was divine or that he had been bodily resurrected.

      • >”I’m not assuming Jesus was mistaken”

        I didn’t say that you were. Would you like to try and again and this time be less defensive?

        >”I am simply trying to show that being sincerely mistaken is another possible explanation ”

        That could only work if there was evidence that He was sincerely mistaken–hence my question: Is there any evidence that He was mistaken?

        >or that he had been bodily resurrected.

        They saw Him–Paul states that there were 600 eyewitnesses. Even those who were anti-Christian never claimed that He wasn’t resurrected. If there had been any doubt the anti-Christians could have taken anyone to the tomb and showed them that the body was still there. They had guards there to make sure that there was no tampering of the evidence. It backfired.

  6. “That [suggesting that it is possible that Jesus was sincerely mistaken] could only work if there was evidence that He was sincerely mistaken–hence my question: Is there any evidence that He was mistaken?

    This is very poor logic, my friend.

    Imagine if your neighbor tells you that he was abducted by space aliens last night, flown to Mars for three hours of mind-probing, and then brought back to his bed.

    “Preposterous!” you exclaim. “You must have been dreaming or delusional.”

    Your neighbor responds, “Do you have any evidence that I was dreaming or delusional? If not, you cannot consider dreams or delusions within the possible explanations for my belief that I was abducted by aliens last night.”

    You do not need to provide one shred of evidence to include the possible explanations of a dream or delusion within your list of hypotheses for the origin of your neighbor’s very extra-ordinary claim. Neither do I need to provide one shred of evidence that Jesus might have been sincerely mistaken to believe that it is POSSIBLE that he was sincerely mistaken.

Let me know your thoughts!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s