From: (Anonymous)	Date: January 15th, 2003 09:12 pm (UTC)		(Link)
Logical flaws

Whether or not one believes in a God is irrelevent when making arguments as to whether or not that God can exist. For this reason, I will leave it a mystery as to my personal beliefs, and will proceed to make notes about your online essays in the context of logic alone, not upon a method of what many of my Christian friends call "apologetics". For the record, I will state that I personally think that your logical arguments are some of the most flawed that I have ever seen. If you so wish to disprove the idea of God, and monotheism in general, you should present arguments that the believers have not heard before. After much thought, here is where I personally find your logic to err:

1. "God Contradicts the Free Will of all Living Beings Including Itself"

a. The idea that God has no choice as to wrong presupposes that wrong and right are independent of that God. If God and the nature of God is the definition of "right" or "good", then "choosing" wrong is merely a contradiction of reality, rather than a different choice as to what reality presents. Thus God has free will to define whatever he thinks is "good", and thus has more free will than any other being.
b. Once again, you are presupposing. What if God exists outside of what we call time? If God exists at all moments at once, and independent of what we call "time" then this argument is immediatly refuted on the basis that the concept upon which it is based becomes arbitrary.
c. This topic is addressed above.
d. Once again, if God is the defining factor of reality then what he is by his own nature determines what "good" and "right", then we can logically assume that anything that is "wrong" is merely a departure from his will. Also, you seem to suggest that free will and the lack thereof are the same by saying that the definition of free will is the ability to turn from God. This is a logical fallacy, and assumes that predisposing something to choose good at all times is giving it free will.


"Logic is More Powerful than God"
I attempted once to use this argument on a Christian, and was immediatly shown the ways in which it was flawed. The Bible does not seperate the two ideas of "logic" and of "God". The Bible actually calls God "logos"- logic itself. This goes back to the argument that I presented before that if the defining factor in the universe is God, then nothing can be more powerful than him because all definitions end with the nature of that God.

"Morals"
This is the biggest mistake, I think, on your entire site, because you suggest that nothing can be known as true, which means that the logic you use is completely subjective as well. Personally, I would pull this off your site as quickly as possible to avoid making a fool out of yourself. The entire purpose of the site is completely destroyed if nothing is sure. Why then are you trying to convince people?


In conclusion:
There are many more powerful arguments than the ones that you present. The arguements on this site occasionally become tiresome because many of them have been exhausted and debated constantly throughout the years, and have now for the most part been dismissed. I have many Christian friends who could logically refute nearly every message on this site. Many cannot. Attempt to find out what monotheists believe before refuting their arguments.

-Steerpike
ktz555@yahoo.com

From: (Anonymous)	Date: May 30th, 2003 12:13 pm (UTC)		(Link)
Good try

Your first argument is flawed, and when reading an article, when the first thing said is wrong, it makes people either not want to read the rest or not listen to the rest even if it is done well. You see, you say God has no free will because he knows what He will do in the future and therefore cannot change it; however, God does not exist in Physical form, and according to the science and math of physics (mainly einsteins relativity) if you take mass away, time becomes undefined, therefore God is unaffected by time, and therefore has no future, past, or present.

I find a lot of the arguments on this page to be unresearched and easily refutable arguments. If the author would actually study Christian Doctrine and Theology, as well as Creation Science and such, almost everything on this page seems to fade into childish arguments that most first year theology students can counter. People need to actually learn about something before they write about it.

lostcow16@hotmail.com

From: (Anonymous)	Date: August 1st, 2003 03:26 pm (UTC)		(Link)

HOW CAN AN ATHIEST ALSO BE A SATANIST? IF YOU ARE NOT A SATANIST HOW COME YOU ARE GIVING OUT INFO ON THIS SUBJECT TO PEOPLE? WILL YOU ALSO GIVE OUT THE WEB SITE FOR CHRISTIANS IF SOMEONE ASKS?