Answers About God From A Famous Ex-Atheist

[entire article deleted by Nyarlathotep: if you are interest in reading it, use the link below]


Been a long while here.
Anyway, I’ve always said I have more respect for agnostics than anyone who says there’s no creator cause I haven’t seen one.
The more you think and get logical, the closer you are to admitting that this ordered universe could NEVER have been without a superior intelligence. The universe screams ID.
Atheism is either as a result of inability to venture into deep critical reasoning because one has other preferences or if the atheist has ventured thus, then they are just staunch, bull-headed denialists.
Cali, Sheldon, Whitefire and co is there anything to learn from Dr. Flew?

I already know what some of you guys might be asking: Some pastors have left the faith as well, does that persuade him?

The difference is the apostates leave because they find that the religious practices are either not working or just difficult to keep. Doesn’t mean belief in creator is irrational.
It’s different when a man on the track of critical reasoning, which atheism makes claim to, advances in reasoning to a point of concession. It shows you that if you really are on the path of reasoning, you should be expecting to arrive at this same point.

I am an atheist, because I have not been provided with sufficient evidence or proof of a god.

@Sorrentino you appear to be appealing to the argument from ignorance, where atheists are expected to offer a counter-argument to your proposition. I will not offer a counter-argument because you must first PROVE a god.

1 Like

Yo @Sorrentino … I assume you haven’t found a page to “copy and paste” addressing the 10 Commandments?

Try thinking for a change.


WOOPS! Right off the bat this one missed the boat. Why in the hell would someone calling themselves an atheist, spend 50 years arguing against the existence of God. This guy is either a complete fucking idiot, completely ignorant of atheism, or a fucktard Christian in disguise.

Which of the Christian gods did he spend 50 years trying to disprove? Wouldn’t you think that he would have figured out that the whole God concept thing was un-falsifiable after the first year? Wouldn’t you think that he would have run into hard sophism and discovered that we can know nothing in the real world with absolute certainty? Which argument do you think finally convinced him that this god thing, whichever one it was, actually exists? I gotta read more!!!

**** Awww Fuck **** I nearly choked to death on a banana. What Atheistic Explanations? Explanations of WHAT? I have never heard an Atheistic Explanation for the non-existence of God. Please explain… (Do you know what non-falsifiable means?)

HOLY FUCK — (How backwards is this shit?) Basically this idiot was convinced by a presuppositionalist, so the article seems to suggest. This is what it says about Atheism…
“Indeed, atheism itself has a number of propositions that have to be accepted by faith, e.g. that something (the universe) came from nothing, non-living matter evolved into living cells by stochastic chemistry, complex specified information arose without intelligence, morality arose by natural selection, etc.”

Utterly and completely WRONG! And where does he go from here???
"“I now believe that the universe was brought into existence by an infinite Intelligence. I believe that this universe’s intricate laws manifest what scientists have called the Mind of God.”

Brought into existence??? Any evidence at all that the universe was ever “OUT OF EXISTENCE?” Of course not. Bullshit from beginning to end.

“Dr. Antony Flew, an Oxford professor who spent 50 years teaching philosophy and constructing clever arguments to support an atheistic point of view.”

Which makes him a fucking idiot!!! UN FALSE FIABLE!!! Why not spend fifty years proving there are no invisible magic unicorns anyplace in the universe. What a fucking moron! Either the writer of the article has gotten everything wrong or the honerable Mr. Flew is an idiot who managed to fool everyone into thinking he was an atheist for 50 years.

WHAT EVIDENCE??? I can’t wait for this!!!

FUCK ME! That is what we are calling evidence? Really? Laws are observable descriptions and not prescriptions. They only apply to the macro universe and break down a Planck time. Mind of God? WTF - Please share. Divine Source - Come on - Since when is an ignorant assertion ‘evidence?’


The laws of nature? God did it. Never mind that the laws of nature are simple observations that science has made that only apply here and now. So lets apply Woo Woo language to them, “These invisible forces” Whenever the word force is used it means “we don’t know.” — The forces appeared???

We have a very good idea of how the forces appeared… Just read about Big Bang Cosmology -

This shit is too long and I have lost all interest in it at this point. Assumptions, bullshit, and utter nonsense. If this man was any kind of a philosopher at all, even a first year philosophy student, he never would have uttered such complete nonsense.

1 Like

Which proves this Mr. Flewoverthecuckoosnest does not have a full set of brain tools. A rational mind understands that the god proposition is unfalsifiable, thus one cannot disprove a god.

This post is one of the lamest appeals to authority for many months.

Name some of those cosmologists and physicists.

Yes, there are now indications that there may be something bigger and grander than the known and observable universe, and that is the entire cosmos (all of everything). And in that concept of the cosmos, no god required.

Bullshit. Science frequently encounters evidence that appears illogical and random. Try understanding the quantum world.

More bullshit. Atheists do not make claims.

  1. Is ordered a binary variable? Like True/False? If so, can you give an example of something that is not ordered?

  2. If ordered isn’t a binary property: what exactly are you comparing the universe against, to see that it is ordered?

I suspect you are using ordered as a weasel word.

1 Like

He he he he… What would a “disordered universe” look like? Ha ha ha ha ha,


I suspect things would look like they are now, as not even earth happened in some exact orderly way. And the asteroids which hit earth happened mostly random, there wasn’t some exact order they hit with. And the one which wiped the dinosaurs out, I can not believe that some god or deity did so either.

Maybe god was drunk?

Short answer; I hope not. If he is convinced, he’s not very bright.

Reason: That reason is a simple logical fallacy called argument from authority. A claim needs to stand on its own merits and not rely on who made the claim.

I am afraid it does, old chap.

Take a long hard look at your “belief”. It has the same rational basis as any of the creationist stories told from Aboriginal Australia to the steppes of Siberia.

It doesn’t mean to say you cannot enjoy your fantasy of actually being of import in this vast universe, but it does mean anyone who values reason will find you amusing, and your views quaint but worthless.

1 Like

I think you’re right.

Belief systems tend to have their own logic. Eg Theology can be very rational.EG read Thomas Aquinas, Augustine of Hippo or even the Lutheran theologian who was murdered by the Nazis** , Deitrich Bonheoffer.

THE problem with theology and biblical hermeneutics is that they are presuppositional. IE they accept the existence of god as a given, which it is not.

Once a premise is accepted, all kinds of logically valid conclusions can be made although untrue.

Over my life I’ve met some brilliant people who were also Christians. They were able to separate their religious beliefs into its own little box. They were quite incapable of rational thought in this one area,.

My basic position remains unchanged; God cannot be argue into or out of existence. Claims made about god(s) have so far been unfalsifiable IE cannot be proved or disproved. Exception: the old testament provides a lot of evidence which demonstrates YHWH was /is a cunt. If only because of his insistence on redemption through blood sacrifice. Now that’s irrational not to mention horribly cruel.


*** Bonhoeffer was executed by the Nazis by being hung with piano wire from a hook. Because he was involved in Operation Valkyrie, the plot to kill Hitler.


In support of my position that belief in a creator and religious beliefs generally are not necessarily irrational :

The 1948 radio debate between Bertrand Russell (arguably the t philosopher of his generation) and Frederick Copleston SJ (Jesuit theologian and philosopher) on the existence of god.

Copleston used the contingency/first cause argument. This was first used I think by Aristotle, and certainly by Plato. Again as one of The 'Five ways/proofs ’ for the existence of god used by Thomas Aquinas in the thirteenth century. Below is a link to the edited version of the debate. There is a longer clip meant to be used as a study guide available free on Youtube.

My second piece of evidence comes from my studies:

In brief: The author of the book (EE Evans Pritchard) cited below witnessed this event:

The Azande people believe that all misfortune is caused by witchcraft.

In the village Pritchard was studying, there was a man who took a nap under the wooden water tower every day at the same time. On this day, the water tower collapsed, killing him. The anthropologist noticed the wooden support were riddled with termites. He opined that it could have collapsed at any any time.

The villagers agreed with him 100%. The tower could have collapsed at any time. BUT, it didn’t. It collapsed when that man was sleeping under it. That it collapsed then was obviously caused by witchcraft. A perfectly rational argument which could also be use in support of fatalism.

I also recommend the [fiction} book ‘The Bridge at San Luis Rey’ by Thornton Wilder

I knew Professor Evan Evans-Pritchard, “EP” (As we knew him) he lived in Jack Straws Lane in Oxford, next door to some Anglican Nuns,. He used to regularly terrify them by appearing through the large hedge and demanding “What is Ku?” and after a couple of appearances continuing “Ku is Mu, silly girl” . He also lived his life “upside down” staying up all night eating a formal dinner at breakfast in his favorite pink pajamas.

I was heavily in unreciprocated love with his daughter Deirdre. sigh And great friends with his two sons. We “parked” a mini van in a tree outside EP’s window…he didn’t notice for 3 months. He did introduce me (twice) to JRR Tolkein which was heady medicine in those days.

Thanks for bringing back those memories.

Please think it through.

I am of the firm opinion that our human exploration of this universe and existence is just beginning. Although (just like a jigsaw puzzle) some pieces are currently missing and some don’t seem to have a place, the overall structure is on a firm foundation as a result of careful observation, testing, and thinking by millions of very smart people, over a span of four plus thousand years. Phenomena and processes can be explained, they do not contradict each other, and many different fields of science (such as genetics and evolution) support each other.

Now let’s examine this god. Where and when did it come from? How can it read and intercede in my dreams? How does this god actually perform miracles? How did it become to possess so much knowledge?

Unless you shrink away and start special pleading (how ironic, coming from someone preaching rational thought and a distaste of “inability to venture into deep critical reasoning”), or worse, “magic”, start explaining.

You won’t be able to.

Wow! You’re welcome. You met Tolkein? How fantastic! How did you find him? I have always had an image of a brilliant, somewhat vague and distracted man, perhaps a bit unkept. Smoked a pipe?..

My tutor was also founder and head of the Anthropology Department at Adelaide University. Professor Bruce Kapferer was a strange , charismatic man and a wonderful lecturer and tutor. .

He called himself Marxist phenomenologist. His speciality was Sri Lanka, especially their masks. He knew a bloke there who made antique masks to sell to the tourists.

Three weeks before the end of my final year, he came in to do his lecture and announced; “I’m going to Sri Lanka in a month or so, anyone want to come?” I was sorely tempted, but getting time of from walk would have been difficult.

One of my fondest memories was doing a paper which covered an area not on the syllabus. When he gave it back he said “Thanks for that, I learned quite a bit” !!!

Sorry Boomer: I gotta go with old man on this one. The fallacies of Thomas, Augustine or Hippo or leven the Lutheran theologian who was murdered by the Nazis Bohheoffer are well established. It can be shown that their attempts at logic are fallacious. Their reasoning “is not logical.”

I am in no way claiming that they were not brilliant. We all know that there are some very intelligent theists out there in the world. But face it… To make the claim that an unfalsifiable claim is true, one must abandon facts, evidence, and logic for a leap of faith smothered in mystical woo woo. There really is no other way to get to a God.

It would be more accurate to say that the universe has some apparent design. However, apparent design does not automatically mean actual design. Of course many things, we know to be designed, (‘intelligently’ so), such as wristwatches, vehicles or buildings etc. But then we know the designers of those things . . . intelligent humans designed them, and we could investigate, and name the designers, and maybe even talk to them.

Many natural things may look designed, even intelligently so. However if we are thinking of plants and animals for example, they differ from wristwatches, vehicles or buildings etc., in that plants and animals are alive, and can produce offspring, the apparent design of which is attributable to the previous generation of said living things.

That is not automatically true, and I’d venture to say it’s not generally true. Many people have left a religion, because they have discovered and become convinced that there is no good evidence to back up any god claims, and that the logic of belief is wrong.

I wouldn’t say that religious belief is necessarily irrational, because the religious people, (though not all), could give their reasons for belief, (such as you outline in your post, Sorrentino). The question is: “Do those reasons amount to anything which reflects reality?” Well maybe the reasons are emotional ones, and not logical ones, and emotions are a part of reality, but emotions are not a good foundation for deciding what is true or false in reality, (IMHO).

And by the way, I count myself as an agnostic atheist, meaning that although I cannot disprove the existence of some gods, I still have no GOOD reason to believe that they exist . . . no good evidence. I do not think that one should believe, before there is good convincing evidence, and so far I’m not convinced. Ignorance of how things work, is no way to come to conclusions about how reality actually works. To say that the universe screams ID seems to be based on ignorance . . . I, (Mutorc), know of no ID claims which have not been rebutted, or shown to be hollow. Fully natural explanations exist, or potentially exist.

Many aspects of the universe scream a LACK of intelligent design, which goes against the idea of an intelligent, (god?), designer for them. Unless that so-called intelligent designer deliberately designs things as though a lack of intelligence had been employed, why do we observe such phenomena? [ Research the recurrent laryngeal nerve in mammals, particularly the giraffe - a prime example of stupid design). An intelligent designer which deliberately uses some stupid design, certainly looks very much like no design and no intelligence in those cases - is that the impression that it would want to convey? No wonder people are atheists.

On the point of being an agnostic atheist, some proposed gods are incoherent, or contradictory, or otherwise impossible, and so one can be a strong atheist with respect to those proposed gods. But to count a particular god in, as a ‘possibly existing intelligent designer’, one would have to know a heck of a lot about the god, in order to determine whether or not it is a possible or an impossible god. And still, we have no good evidence for any god. Some things in nature LOOK intelligently designed, does not ‘cut the mustard’.


Mutorc S’yriah

1 Like

Actually he was charming, offered me sherry, was fascinated by my Gaelic and then went off on some wonderful rant about Nordic influence on Barra …all of which was like “Huh??” to me. The second time was in EP’s garden ( They were both Oxford Dons) where we enjoyed some of Colonel Morrells brew (The Oxford Brewery) and he was charming but vague about the publishing date of the Silmarillion…which his son ended up finishing and publishing years after his death.

His daughter in law ended up in a lovely picture book cottage, behind my Pub in Oxfordshire some years later. She had pugs and became the guardian of my Red Tabby Siamese when I left the country. She had a raft of Tolkein tales…

No, it would not be accurate to claim the universe has some apparent design. (This is a bullshit way of attempting to sneak in a designer. That which has design is designed.) Perhaps it is your limited vocabulary that causes you to make such a choice in words. Do you even know what the word means?



a plan or drawing produced to show the look and function or workings of a building, garment, or other object before it is built.

an arrangement of lines or shapes created to form a pattern or decoration.

Things do not “Look Designed.” They may seem to have some organization, or structure to them; however, this in no way implies design. If you assert design, you must demonstrate a designer. I have no trouble at all demonstrating structure and explaining it through completely natural means. Structure and organization from the formation and bonding of atoms in the accretion disc to the structure of molecules, elements, amino acids, RNA, DNA, and all things living. At no point in time is the magic hand of a “Designer / Creator” either evidenced or required. You are making one big God of the Gaps assertion.

By allowing the theists to get away with the assertion that things “look intelligently designed” you are giving up too much territory. Design, necessarily implies a designer. There is no reason at all to give up this ground. Instead, they can be asked to demonstrate design absent natural causes by showing that their designer is real… “It simply leads to a God of the Gaps or an Argument From Incredulity.”

Oh, need to apologise.

I’m perfectly willing to agree to differ. I will simply continue to bask in the smug glow which comes with the knowledge that I’m right and you’re wrong. :innocent: