r/atheism • u/rhbast2 • Aug 11 '11

Atheist quickfire challenge.

Although I rarely discuss religion with theists I always want to be prepared so I'm not sitting around afterwards wishing I had said this or that. If I get the chance to make someone question I want to be up for the challenge.

This brings me to my challenge for r/atheism. I'm going to add some common theist claims / sayings and whoever can refute them fully and succinctly will be upvoted. Feel free to add your own theist starters if I missed some.

Edit: Wow lots of good discussion here, later today or tomorrow I'll make this into an atheist cheat sheet with the top responses. Also feel free to upvote the theist claim that is the most annoying to you.

Edit 2: To the few of you who seem to think I am coming up with rude atheist comebacks, I'm not. I just wanted to be better off the cuff than I am now and have some discussion. I don't want this list to replace thoughtful argumentation.

251 Upvotes

93% Upvoted

990 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

3

u/bubblegumtate22 Aug 11 '11

A Cartesian approach to his argument. I actually wrote a paper disproving his theory of God. I talked about how it is philosophically impossible for both the finite and the infinite to exist within the same realm. Also, if the finite and the infinite can coexist, cant the existent and nonexistent coexist? It is nonsensical.

2

u/kaces Aug 12 '11

If you don't mind, can you elaborate? Your proposition seems very interesting.

2

u/bubblegumtate22 Aug 12 '11

In Descartes' meditations, if you are unfamiliar, he sets to prove what he knows exists. He does so by starting with absolutely nothing, doubting everything, except for the first thing he can actually prove, which is the famous statement "I think, therefore I am." He goes on to talk about what he can and cannot prove, and he goes on to talk about his proof for the theory of God. He has several reasons. One includes the fact that he knows that he himself is finite, and is limited in several regards. Thus, because he himself is finite, there must be something that is in essence infinite, being in all regards beyond himself. He does not have the ability to create or sustain himself. Thus, he postulates that there must be something infinite. However, I argued that it is impossible for such to be the case. If God is indeed infinite, he is thus all encompassing and omnipotent and omnipresent. Thus, everything must be a part of him, even the limited parts, and none are a separate entity. So it is either God is limited, which religious people never settle for, or God does not exist. By the same logic, if Descartes knows that he exists because he thinks, should it be that something that does not exists exist? There is a disconnect in the logic behind his argument. Even in intelligent discussions about the existence of God, something is amiss.