Preview: The Great God Debate

Warning: This piece may start out light and hopefully humorous, but I realized as I was writing it that it was impossible to end it that way, so if you're offended by arguments against the existence of God, you might want to stop reading now, or at least before you get to the ugly part. Cheers.


Less than three hours from now, we're finally going to know if God exists. I don't think he does, and I pray he doesn't, but just in case, I have "he does" in the pool, which I expected would never pay out, but tonight, the experts will finally sort it all out when Kirk Cameron debates some atheists on Nightline.

I saw a preview of the "for" argument when Mr. Cameron appeared on O'Reilly tonight, and I must say it's pretty convincing…

… The following may contain spoilers …

But maybe I'm kidding myself because it's the Cameron argument is the same one that brought me back from the brink – and scared the hell out of me… or make that -into me-.

It's that everything is just too complicated to have arisen from nothing, and that if the most complex things on Earth have their creators, it seems implausible at best that all this – the wonderful universe filled with death and destruction, could have sprung up spontaneously if only because there seems to have had to have been something, some environment, for it to have sprung from.

I'd like to pause now so ask, may God forgive me for that mess.. and for what's about to follow.

For Mr. Cameron also presented what he thought would be the atheists' argument against the existence of a supreme being, and note the lack of caps there, because here's the argument as Kirk stated is, and which I also agree with, unfortunately…

It's that there can't be a living that is such a megalomaniac.

There it is. I personally think "megalomaniac" is overly charitable, since an actual god would be the biggest mass murderer in history, but that infinitely understates the problem and does his deeds such a disservice, since they are so many and varied. That is to say, horrific.

But the point is that atheists do worse at proving God doesn't exist than believers do at showing he does, so it's perhaps fortunate that non-believes don't have to prove anything. And if believers are right, I wouldn't expect to be looking at an all-just, all-good guy when judgment day arrives.

But hope springs eternal, so I sure hope I'm wrong.

Dominoes vobiscum, and let them fall where they may.

Read and post comments | Send to a friend


About tedwest

A longtime veteran of comedy and political forums, I decided that I needed a more restful venue because... well... I finally hate everybody. Except my wife that is... and my ex-wife.. and... no, that's about it. I lead about as simple a life as one can, preferring activities that include anything that doesn't involve going out and seeing YOU! And I particularly enjoy what I call "Get the Bitch" movies on Lifetime. You know the ones where the intended victim finally does something so incredibly stupid that she forfeits her right to live, and from that moment on you're rooting for the stalker. Of course, it rarely works out the way you want, but when it does, the feeling you get is... well, there's nothing else like it, other than, maybe, eating chocolate chip cookies. Oh, and I'm proudly anti-wildlife, both foreign and domestic, and anti-environment - especially foreign environments. I think Howard Stern put it best when he said, "If fifty percent of the population died tomorrow, I can live with that." And I feel the same about the other fifty percent, so together, we've pretty much got it all covered.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Preview: The Great God Debate

  1. dox^2 says:

    Put me down for "he doesn't"

  2. TedWest says:

    I missed the show! Can you believe it? I mean, the Earth could end and I might not hear about it until O'Reilly makes it his talking points the next evening. So is there a God or not?

  3. HV says:

    Yes, Ted there is.
    Cause I said so.

  4. Clarifier says:

    Consider the argument from insufficient stupidity: Unaided matter is not of itself stupid enough to bind together into self replicating units that end up being more irritable and frustrated than their component parts.

Leave a Reply

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

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

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )


Connecting to %s