The Invisibility Test

By WizenedSage (Galen Rose) ~

I think simple logic points the way to an excellent test of whether a god is a real or true god, as opposed to a human creation. Now this test may not be absolutely perfect, but the failure rate can easily be proven to be extremely low, less than 0.0004% (less than 1 part in 2,500).

I propose that any god who/which is claimed to be invisible is a false god.

How can we know this, you ask? Well, consider that all of the gods that man has invented throughout history, that have been believed in for any length of time, have been invisible to the common man - or at least out of sight, like the ancient Greek gods high up on Mount Olympus.

The following site lists the names of over 2,500 gods which have been believed in and worshiped by convinced followers in historic times: http://www.rationalresponders.com/a_big_list_of_gods_but_nowhere_near_all_of_them . This is where the 2,500 comes from in my error-rate calculation above. There are doubtless thousands of others we know nothing about because they are from prehistory and /or non-literate cultures.

Of course, legends have it that a few humans actually saw a god, as is claimed for Moses, but Moses was not a common man, so for all the rest of us, Bible-god is invisible.

But what about Jesus? Didn’t people see Jesus? Well, that is debatable. All anyone “knows” about Jesus has come to us second-hand, in the writings of others. He left no writings himself, and there are no pictures or video. But, if some people actually did see Jesus, it was a tiny fraction of the world’s population, and it was for a very brief period. While many Christians today claim to have a “relationship” with Jesus, he is nevertheless invisible to the common man. Even those who claim to have this relationship don’t actually see Jesus.

According to the Bible, Bible-god wants desperately for people to know that he exists and to worship him. Now consider that we really can only be absolutely certain of a god we can actually see or detect with instruments; a god who proves beyond a shadow of a doubt by his testable actions in the real, physical world that he exists.

So far, the only scientific, objective tests of Bible-god have had to do with prayer, and those tests have consistently failed to prove the existence of that god. (See http://new.exchristian.net/2011/03/personal-god.html for examples.)

I think it is safe to say that all of those gods listed in the link above, and those thousands more which couldn’t be listed, were claimed to be invisible to - or otherwise hidden from - the common man. We know this because any visible god could easily be tested, would have been tested, and thus would have been proven false, and those who created these gods were well aware of this. If we throw a rock at a visible god and it hits him, does he say “ouch?” Does he bruise like a human? Testing visible gods is ridiculously easy, and that’s why man has always invented invisible gods.

Since we now know that ALL gods other than Bible-god that were believed in for any length of time were invisible, and all were false, the odds are overwhelming, thousands-to-one, that Bible-god, being likewise invisible, is also a false god.

At this point some believers will claim that god wants us to prove our faith by believing in him despite our not being able to see him. Well, since it’s a fact that we can’t see him, shouldn’t we expect his cheerleaders to come up with something like this? What else could they do? Should we really just accept such an obviously transparent argument? If Jesus provided visible proof of his resurrection and deity status to Doubting Thomas, as the Bible contends, then he surely thought Thomas had a valid doubt. Why should we be expected to be satisfied with less evidence than Thomas was provided?

If Bible-god truly existed and wanted mankind to believe in him, as the Bible says, then the obvious way to accomplish this would be to make himself visible so that we could easily test him and then believe - all of us – without doubts. But, as attentive humans have noted, the invisible and the non-existent look very much alike. Invisibility has always been used as a cover for nonexistence, since the very first gods were created. Why should we think it would be any different for Bible-god?

And really, there’s no need to be afraid of incurring a god’s wrath for a mistake. At this late date in history, surely no reasonable god could expect us to believe in yet another invisible god.

Comments

So Just How Dumb Were Jesus’ Disciples? The Resurrection, Part VII.

By Robert Conner ~ T he first mention of Jesus’ resurrection comes from a letter written by Paul of Tarsus. Paul appears to have had no interest whatsoever in the “historical” Jesus: “even though we have known Christ according to the flesh, we know him so no longer.” ( 2 Corinthians 5:16 ) Paul’s surviving letters never once mention any of Jesus’ many exorcisms and healings, the raising of Lazarus, or Jesus’ virgin birth, and barely allude to Jesus’ teaching. For Paul, Jesus only gets interesting after he’s dead, but even here Paul’s attention to detail is sketchy at best. For instance, Paul says Jesus “was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures” ( 1 Corinthians 15:4 ), but there are no scriptures that foretell the Jewish Messiah would at long last appear only to die at the hands of Gentiles, much less that the Messiah would then be raised from the dead after three days. After his miraculous conversion on the road to Damascus—an event Paul never mentions in his lette

Are You an Atheist Success Story?

By Avangelism Project ~ F acts don’t spread. Stories do. It’s how (good) marketing works, it’s how elections (unfortunately) are won and lost, and it’s how (all) religion spreads. Proselytization isn’t accomplished with better arguments. It’s accomplished with better stories and it’s time we atheists catch up. It’s not like atheists don’t love a good story. Head over to the atheist reddit and take a look if you don’t believe me. We’re all over stories painting religion in a bad light. Nothing wrong with that, but we ignore the value of a story or a testimonial when we’re dealing with Christians. We can’t be so proud to argue the semantics of whether atheism is a belief or deconversion is actually proselytization. When we become more interested in defining our terms than in affecting people, we’ve relegated ourselves to irrelevance preferring to be smug in our minority, but semantically correct, nonbelief. Results Determine Reality The thing is when we opt to bury our

ACTS OF GOD

By David Andrew Dugle ~ S ettle down now children, here's the story from the Book of David called The Parable of the Bent Cross. In the land Southeast of Eden – Eden, Minnesota that is – between two rivers called the Big Miami and the Little Miami, in the name of Saint Gertrude there was once built a church. Here next to it was also built a fine parochial school. The congregation thrived and after a multitude of years, a new, bigger church was erected, well made with clean straight lines and a high steeple topped with a tall, thin cross of gold. The faithful felt proud, but now very low was their money. Their Sunday offerings and school fees did not suffice. Anon, they decided to raise money in an unclean way. One fine summer day the faithful erected tents in the chariot lot between the two buildings. In the tents they set up all manner of games – ring toss, bingo, little mechanical racing horses and roulette wheels – then all who lived in the land between the two rivers we

Christian TV presenter reads out Star Wars plot as story of salvation

An email prankster tricked the host of a Christian TV show into reading out the plots of The Fresh Prince of Bel Air and Star Wars in the belief they were stories of personal salvation. The unsuspecting host read out most of the opening rap to The Fresh Prince, a 1990s US sitcom starring Will Smith , apparently unaware that it was not a genuine testimony of faith. The prankster had slightly adapted the lyrics but the references to a misspent youth playing basketball in West Philadelphia would have been instantly familiar to most viewers. The lines read out by the DJ included: "One day a couple of guys who were up to no good starting making trouble in my living area. I ended up getting into a fight, which terrified my mother." The presenter on Genesis TV , a British Christian channel, eventually realised that he was being pranked and cut the story short – only to move on to another spoof email based on the plot of the Star Wars films. It began: &quo

On Living Virtuously

By Webmdave ~ A s a Christian, living virtuously meant living in a manner that pleased God. Pleasing god (or living virtuously) was explained as: Praying for forgiveness for sins Accepting Christ as Savior Frequently reading the Bible Memorizing Bible verses Being baptized (subject to church rules) Attending church services Partaking of the Lord’s Supper Tithing Resisting temptations to lie, steal, smoke, drink, party, have lustful thoughts, have sex (outside of marriage) masturbate, etc. Boldly sharing the Gospel of Salvation with unbelievers The list of virtuous values and expectations grew over time. Once the initial foundational values were safely under the belt, “more virtues'' were introduced. Newer introductions included (among others) harsh condemnation of “worldly” music, homosexuality and abortion Eventually the list of values grew ponderous, and these ideals were not just personal for us Christians. These virtues were used to condemn and disrespect fro

I can fix ignorance; I can't fix stupid!

By Bob O ~ I 'm an atheist and a 52-year veteran of public education. I need not tell anyone the problems associated with having to "duck" the "Which church do you belong to?" with my students and their parents. Once told by a parent that they would rather have a queer for their sons' teacher than an atheist! Spent HOURS going to the restroom right when prayers were performed: before assemblies, sports banquets, "Christmas Programs", awards assemblies, etc... Told everyone that I had a bladder problem. And "yes" it was a copout to many of you, but the old adage (yes, it's religious) accept what you can't change, change that which you can and accept the strength to know the difference! No need arguing that which you will never change. Enough of that. What I'd like to impart is my simple family chemistry. My wife is a Baptist - raised in a Baptist Orphanage (whole stories there) and is a believer. She did not know my religi

Search This Blog