Sometimes, For All to Live, Something Must Die

Christianity’s most outrageous and ruinous conceptual coup has also been its most brilliant, and has positioned the church for success in perpetuity by poisoning the well of humankind until the end of time. In a single stroke, this odious religion has enslaved a large portion of the human species by implanting the following malignant, two-headed brainworm into a hundred generations of potentially reasonable people:

 

 a) Instead of being an integral and necessary part of the way the universe works, death is a curse (hence dreaded – not simply feared, as our biology would have it) incurred by “sin”(hence “a shame,” especially if self-inflicted).

 

b) Christianity offers a way to avoid that curse even as one appears to succumb to it.

 

The latter an inconvenient datum that is rationalized to insignificance (Granny didn’t really die, she just went home to be with Jesus), a way into eternal life. And it indoctrinates children with that nonsense before they’re old enough to recognize the difference between fantasy – especially of the wishful thinking variety – and reality.

 

That’s why Christianity is never going to go away. Talk about brilliant! Is any more effective program of mind control even conceivable?
Continue reading “Sometimes, For All to Live, Something Must Die”

The Power of Ockham’s Razor

Ockham’s Razor is a simple concept. Essentially, it says that when two explanations have equal amount of explaining power, it is best to take the simpler explanation over the more complex one. I have discussed it in passing within previous articles, but I really believe that this concept deserves a post of its own. This is because Ockham’s Razor is an extremely valuable concept in debating theists, who like to rationalize away the problems with their belief system, and really tip a debate with two seemingly viable explanations for an event in favor of the atheist. When used properly, this logical tool literally cuts through the bull that I often see Christian apologists and other theists try to peddle.

 

I recently had a conversation with someone over the problem of evil, and why bad things happen in our world. My explanation is simple: Bad things happen because God is not in control of the universe. There is no evidence this being exists, and the state of the universe seems incompatible with this being’s core characteristics. An omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent being cannot exist because such a deity could have made the universe without evil; it would know that this universe would lead to evil, and an omnibenevolent being would seek to minimize evil. Since evil exists, this model of God cannot exist.

Continue reading “The Power of Ockham’s Razor”

Live Debate Sunday! Should Abortion Be Legal with Trent Horn & Jonathan Brotherton

Atheist Analysis S03 E13: Should abortion remain legal? Catholic Apologist Trent Horn VS Jonathan Brotherton

Should abortion remain legal?

1116debate_abortion

This will be a LIVE DEBATE between Trent Horn and Jonathan Brotherton. They will be debating whether Abortion should remain legal. Jonny will be taking the affirmative while Trent will take the negative stance. Do not miss this debate as it will be a lively debate and we will have audience participation at the end of the show.

If you would like more information about Trent Horn please refer to the following links. http://trenthorn.com/ and http://www.catholic.com/profiles/trent-horn

To watch the show live and use our interactive chat please click here: http://atheistanalysis.com/current-event/

You can also watch it later on our YouTube page here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AOXKVzzZUCo
Continue reading “Live Debate Sunday! Should Abortion Be Legal with Trent Horn & Jonathan Brotherton”

Defending Atheism, and Why Presuppositionalist Apologetics Fail

When theists run out of conventional arguments for the existence of God, sometimes they grow desperate, and take the so called “nuclear option” of attempting to cast doubt on common epistemologies many atheists rely on like empiricism, rationalism, and naturalism. This was the primary approach Sye Ten Bruggencate took in his recent debate against Matt Dillahunty in Memphis, and I am sure many atheists who read this have experienced these kinds of arguments in debating theists. Seeing how this is my first blog post on the Atheist Analysis, and considering how the Bruggencate vs Dillahunty debate is still fresh in everyone’s mind, it makes sense to both comment on presuppositionalism, as well as defend the worldview many atheists rely upon.

Continue reading “Defending Atheism, and Why Presuppositionalist Apologetics Fail”