Friday, June 19, 2009

Open Letter to Theists

Dear Theist:

We’ve spent a lot of time debating each other recently. We’ve debated religion, politics, social issues, and science. Often, you and I are on the opposite side of the fence from each other. I am writing you today to tell you that I am tired of these debates. I am tired of the intellectual dishonesty that you employ while trying to make a point. I am tired of you arguing about things of which you have little or no direct knowledge of and of which you have only read the same, weary apologetics. I have precious little time to waste on your silliness, but I try to give you all an equal share of my time. However, if you want to continue having a share of my time, we have to have just a few ground rules.

1. Rules of logic apply. I know, I know. This one is tough for you. You love to beg the question, fallaciously use a priori arguments, and are a good friend of the straw man. However, I will call you out on this. If you want to debate and discuss with me – you have to use appropriate logic.

2. The burden of proof is on you. You are the one claiming to have a personal relationship with a deity. You are the one claiming that god exists and works miracles in your life. It is not my job to disprove your claims. It is your job to prove them. If you can’t perhaps you should shut up.

3. Learn a little science and philosophy before coming into the debate. Nothing shouts ignorance more than when you completely distort a science principle or misuse a philosophical idea. I encourage you to actually read for yourself. Don’t be a parrot for Lee Stroebel or Ray Comfort. Those guys are idiots and you make yourself an even bigger idiot for parroting them.

4. Gaps in knowledge are NOT proof of your god. I will admit here and in any debate that science does not have all of the answers. In fact, the more we learn, the more we realize how much about the universe we do not understand. This does not mean that there must be a creator – it only means we need to keep learning. Moreover, even if it did mean that there must be a creator, it does not at all mean that the creator was YOUR god. The “god of the gaps” argument only reflects the stunning gaps in your logic.

5. Don’t quote the Bible (or other holy texts) at me and expect me to accept it as truth. Really, have you read that book? It is so full of holes, it should be renamed the Holey Bible. Don’t even go there.


It all boils down to this: your world-view is based upon your relationship with your invisible, undetectable, and highly unlikely god. You construct your ideas in science, politics, and other social issues from this world-view. If you really, really want to be able to defend your views on these subjects, you need to be able to defend your belief in god. Good luck with that. I’ll be here . . .


Smiling Wolf said...

Can I have this as a tat on my forehead? A little lengthy, sure, but think of the pain it will SAVE listening to theistic "logic." -Krista

Brian Dyk said...

Sure. Go for small print . . .

Anonymous said...

I initially found it puzzling that you would publish an open letter and then deliberately not inform me that it had been posted. Then I read your letter and understood immediately – it has so many false statements and empty accusations, posting it on your obscure blog with its meager following was the safest, most cowardly way for you to beat your chest after being intellectually shellacked on FB. Was this move intended to boost your wounded self-esteem? How pathetic.

I would dissect your false claims and accusations point by point, but without the benefit of having our mutual friend's FB dialogue for your readers to review for themselves, it would just be my word against yours. A pity, since your readers are denied access to your incoherent rants -- rants that compelled our friend to delete the dialogue strings to save you from further embarrassment.

Now, it is up to you to prove just how brilliant you are and how “intellectually dishonest”, etc. that I am. Be careful, though: this will require substantiation, which as you have demonstrated repeatedly, is not your strong suit…