I sent this to some kid named AJ whom I found through YouTube. To me, the tragedy is that AJ is, at least in his videos, about 15… maybe a little older. And yet he’s seemingly devoted his life to meaningless, bullshit nonsense. Ah, sweet indoctrination. I followed links to his site and saw 1 of the more annoying so-called logical arguments for a creator’s existence. Following is my letter to him.
“I saw your piece in response to Dawkins’ book The God Delusion, and though I was going to write to comment on that, I found the following instead.
“>CUMULATIVE CASE FOR A CREATOR SUMMARIZED
>• Premise #1 – Whatever begins to exist must have a cause.
“This is an assumption. And it’s intellectually dishonest. We don’t know that there is always a cause to anything that exists. The only reason one would state this is in order to later justify one’s already held belief. Confirmation bias.
“>Premise #2 – The universe began to exist. The conclusion logically and inescapably follows: the universe has a cause.
“Only if you believe your own assumption, which would be foolhardy and illogical as we do not know that everything that began necessarily had a cause.
“>• The initial conditions of the universe, given in the big bang theory itself, must have been incredibly fine tuned beyond
“Must have been? How do you know this? How do you know the “fine tuning” would be beyond comprehension? Beyond your comprehension perhaps, but that doesn’t equal beyond all comprehension and therefore impossible. Argument from ignorance and appeal to incredulity.
“> This is either due to chance, natural law, or design. It is too incomprehensible to be explained by natural law, or chance; therefore, the best explanation is design.
“Just because you personally don’t currently have the explanation does not mean that what you already assume to be true must be true. That’s like saying I see thunderbolts (and I don’t yet understand how lightning works), I believe in a thunder god, therefore the thunder god must have created the thunderbolts.
“>• If objective moral values exist, then God exists. Objective moral values–morals that are legal and binding whether anyone believes in them or not. Objective moral values do exist (we know this
intuitively); therefore God exists.
“Another wild assumption. The cold, hard, documented fact of the matter is that there are few moral values that are universal and therefore can be considered objective. The incest taboo leaps to mind. However, you must be aware that several so-called moral values of today were not held years go and vice versa. This very fact proves that morality is not ultimately objective. And this is again intellectually dishonest. The only reason to even suggest this is to then justify one’s already held belief in the concept of objective morality.
“But let’s assume for a minute that moral values are objective. Even if all societies on Earth, for all of human history, held the exact set of moral values. That proves nothing other than this occurred. One very likely explanation is that all of those societies found that specific set of moral values advantageous to the society. It says nothing of the supernatural.
“And let’s be clear. What exactly, specifically do you mean by “moral value”? The term is excessively loaded and politically charged. Be specific.
“And wait a minute, your standard for a moral value is if something is legal? What about when laws change on moral issues? It happens all the time.
“>• After Jesus died on the cross, three facts remained: the empty tomb, the appearances of Jesus after the resurrection, and the disciples belief that Jesus had risen from the dead.
“How do we know any of this to be true?
“>Contemporary scholarship agrees on these three facts;
“That’s a very bold claim. Any evidence or just a blind assertion? I have never heard of a legitimate, extra-Christian historian, anthropologist, archaeologist, or other expert who has proclaimed the above to be true. And even if one had, that doesn’t make it true.
“>every attempt to explain these facts away have been completely disregarded.
“When, how, and by whom? I’m sure you’ve disregarded every attempt, but you have an obvious bias. You would disregard any claim to this nature. Why should we trust you? You’ll say anything to spread your ‘good word.’
“>• You can know God exists apart from the evidence by personally receiving Jesus Christ as Lord. Please visit NeedGod.com
“So after all your attempts and making logical fallacy sound like logic, you rely on the same thing every Christian relies on. Just believe and you’ll believe! No problem. Give me one single reason why I should believe you and not any other religion, myth, or legend in the history of humanity.”