Godless: How an Evangelical Preacher Became One of America's Leading Atheists

by Dan Barker

Time is a dimension, not a thing.

That would be like measuring the very concept of measuring, which is jumping up one logical sphere.

If God is outside of time, then is time outside of God? If so, there is something else besides God in the cosmos.

But since a set should not be considered a member of itself, the cosmological argument is comparing apples and oranges.

You can’t draw an inference or law from the relationships between items in a set that applies to the set as a whole.

Such thinking inaptly transfers a truth from one level to another.

the clause “begins to exist” should not mean the same thing when applied to “the universe” that it means when applied to individual “things” within the universe.

The “all men are mortal” argument does not have the same logical structure as the Kalam.

Every man who exists has a mother, and it seems to me your argument is that therefore the human race must have a mother, but obviously the human race hasn’t a mother—that’s a different logical sphere.”

This implies (as we have seen) that there are some things (NBE) that are not a part of this particular set.

This is supported by the fact that “begins to exist” is singular, referring to one “thing” in the set BE.

In order to be considered a “thing,” an object must be a part of a larger context within which and by which it can be limited. The object must be able to be “pulled away” from other objects.

But is the “set of all things” a “thing” itself? How is the set of all things distinguished from other things or other sets?

did not create myself because if I did, then I would be greater than myself.

it is proper for you to infer a designer while it is not proper for me.

It would take me an eternity to remember back to eternity, leaving me no time to do anything else, so it is impossible for me to confirm if I existed forever.

I can only imagine one possible answer, and I would appreciate your reaction. I know that I exist. I know that I could not have created myself. I also know that there is no higher God who could have created me. Since I can’t look above myself, then perhaps I should look below myself for a creator. Perhaps—this is speculative, so bear with me—perhaps you created me.

On the one hand you use logic to try to prove my existence. On the other hand, when logic hits a dead end you abandon it and invoke “faith” and “mystery.”

If I don’t need a cause, then why do you?

(Revelation 4:11) If your purpose is to please me, what is my purpose? To please myself? Is that all there is to life?

Since you humans fall way short of perfection, by your own admission (and I agree), then self-improvement provides you with a quest. It gives you something to do. Someday you hope to be as perfect as you think I am. But since I am already perfect, by definition, then I don’t need such a purpose. I’m just sort of hanging out, I guess.

Many of you assert that it is inappropriate to seek purpose within yourself, that it must come from outside.

If I simply destroy all the unbelievers, I may as well have created only believers in the first place.

How would I know if people were claiming to love me for my own sake, or simply to avoid punishment?

How would you feel if you had brought some children into the world knowing that they were going to be tormented eternally in a place you built for them? Could you live with yourself? Wouldn’t it have been better not to have brought them into the world in the first place?

I don’t even want to be loved because to want is to lack.

If my righteous judgment demanded absolute satisfaction, then Jesus should have paid the price in full…don’t you think?

If my nature is perfect, then I am living up to a standard.

If I am living up to a standard, then I am not God.

To have a nature or character means to be one way and not another.

It means that there are limits.

that proves the point! If they use such an argument, they are admitting that at least part of the bible is not acceptable for today’s society.

who credit the bible for their standards are giving credit where credit is not due.

The word “holy” means “set apart,” “sacred” or “clean” and has nothing to do with “good” or “right.”

To the humanist, however, consequences, not punishment, happen as a natural effect of the behavior itself.

the evil of the situation exists in the potential

In the minds of Christians, authority equals morality. God is sovereign.

Native Americans, Jews, American blacks and South-African natives, and scores of pagan peoples around the world who had the misfortune of being born and raised outside of the “true” faith. We all know about the Crusades in the name of Jesus, the Spanish Inquisition, the Catholic-Protestant bloodshed in Northern Ireland and the militant Christian factions in the Middle East.

Most “Christian charity” is given to prove the superiority of Christianity or to win converts, not because human life is good, valuable and worthy of respect in its own right.

“Men tend to have the beliefs that suit their passions. Cruel men believe in a cruel God and use their belief to excuse their cruelty. Only kindly men believe in a kindly God, and they would be kindly in any case.”

He drowned the entire population of the planet, saving one family. He sent a plague to kill all the first-born children in Egypt, human and animal. He rained fire and brimstone on Sodom, killing everyone—boys, girls, babies, pregnant women, animals. He sent his Israelite warriors to destroy the neighboring pagan tribes—men, women and children.

Numbers 25:16-17,

(Judges

11:30-40). In II Samuel 21:1-14 the sacrifice of seven of Saul’s sons, who were hanged, caused God to be appeased.