Our New Home

We have a new home, come join us at WeAreSMRT (We Are Skeptical Minds & Rational Thinkers)

The Forum

Saturday, July 19, 2008

Absolute Knowledge of God

Last night as I was getting ready for bed, I was thinking about a parody response to the absolute knowledge shtick of gold in China of the Atheist Test for my seven-part debunk of it. The commentary would also point out that they make a claim that there is one nugget of gold in China (and then expand on the supernatural aspects of the gold). While thinking about it, I realized what I haven't seen pointed out before: his shtick should also be applied to him when he brings it up (like most of his arguments).
You claim that there is only one god; no more, no less. Exactly one and only one (since 1=3 and 3=1). To make such a claim that no other gods exist requires absolute knowledge. To say "there are no other gods," and to be correct in the statement, you must be omniscient.
There's obviously other things wrong about the statement (such as the correct part), but I thought that was humorous to point out if no one else had thought to post that back to him every time he pulls out the absolute knowledge argument against atheists "knowing there is no god."

I could anticipate Ray's response to this: We know there is God and God knows there is no other god. Since God is omniscient, we also know there is no other god. Therefore, there is only one god: the Christian God. QED.


  1. This hurt my head....I just posted on breasts!!! You know, RAY COMFORT'S NIGHTMARE...oh no, I thought of a parady.

  2. It also requires absolute knowledge to say that nobody has ever found a crockaduck.

  3. Clos...are joining in the strike?

    Yeah, the absolute know schtick is a common fundie trump card. The fundie claims that the we can know there is a god with absolute certainty, and then god tells us all the truths, and since god is perfect, we know absolutely that these things are true.

    But puny science only has tentative truths. Hulk smash!

  4. I figure any day now Ray is going to make a post about the errors of science and cite The Hulk as an example of how human scientific thinking goes wrong. "See what happens when you stop trusting in God and start trusting in science? And by the way, Dr. Bruce Banner was a creationist."

  5. geoff,

    I was banned from Ray's blog a few months ago for saying "Jesus Titty Fucking Christ", which he claims he only deletes blasphemy, but instead, he used this as an excuse to get rid of me. I embarrassed him pretty bad shorty before by challenging him to a debate on evolution after he told me it was bunk. He was forced to admit he didn't know anything about it.

    What I could see happening is Ray making a bunch of accounts and posting for us in desperation!!

  6. LCJ,

    "It also requires absolute knowledge to say that nobody has ever found a crockaduck."

    According to your worldview, how do you know that?



  7. Clos The 'Nazi' Atheist

    Your worldview requires you to sin, you atheist!

    Stop spending your time studying science, it leads to evolution...which leads to the Holocaust!

    We have been blessed by Him! You will burn in Hell on the path you're on, Atheist.

    Turn to him! Stop learning, and put your trust and intelligence in Christ Alone!

    I was in a bus, handing out million dollar tracts, and everybody enjoyed them. The bus driver asked me to drive the bus, and I while I was doing it, I told him how wonderful it would be to drive a bus in heaven because the streets are of gold. He agreed with me!

    Turn from your sin, Atheist! Don't burn in Hell!

    Ciao! ;)

    Praying for ya'!


    Ps. Watch Hell's best kept secret on my website and blogs!

  8. RS,

    Don't make me quote Einstein and Newton, which proves that it is smart to be a Christian. Einstein was a devoit Christian and was falsely labelled a Jew. He knew that he had to trust in Jesus, he wasn't a fool. Atheists are fools. Einstein was not a fool. Therefore, he was not an atheist, he was a Christian. Stephen Hawking is working on what is in God's mind. I could quote him as well. Stephen Hawking is no fool, he is a cosmetologist, so he must be smart, and if he isn't a fool, and is smart, he must be a Christian. We know these men can't be fools because the Bible says that atheists are fools and we know the Bible is true because it says it is. You fool!

  9. An absolute truth is what is true for every possible circumstance. The reason why an absolute truth is what is true for every possible circumstance is because if there is any possible circumstance where this truth isn’t true, then it’s possibly false. If something is possibly false, then what makes it absolutely true. So again, an absolute truth is what is true for every possible circumstance.

    Truth itself is systemic, in other words it needs a system of proof; to prove, it needs a means of decision, a method of resolution, a way of coming to the conclusion that something is true. So this method must exist before the truth in order to be able to prove that it’s true, and this is why there can be no such things as an absolute truth, all truths are systemic (relative to a system). This is different then relative morals; in relative morals we have what is relative to an individuals perspective or what’s subjective. In truth we always have what’s objective relative to a system of proof, not an individuals perspective. So this is a careful thing to the issue of relative truth. Relative truth is vary often misunderstood, many people talk about why truth isn’t relative. People will talk about what is subjective, which is because they’re so concerned with ethics and human behavior, they’re concerne is they come across that morals are relative, then they come across what is subjective, and they here that truth is relative too and it just flips the over the bend.

    Anyway, truth is objective, but truth is not absolute. In other words truth is not eternal, it needs a means of resolution. As to what is true; well it’s only propositions that are true, it’s only statements in language that are true about objects. For an example if I said that my car was red, well, it’s a statement about my car that is true. My car isn’t true, there’s no part of my car that holds the property truth. Again it’s statements about my car that are true, it’s propositions which are true or false. Furthermore there’s no proposition without a language, but we first need a mind to make up a language, then you need a language, then you have the word truth and you can grant that meaning, then you have a means of resolution to say what is true or false, but you need a whole system to exists before the truth can exist. Therefore no truth is possibly eternal.

    No truth can possibly be eternal, And so therefore there are no absolute truths. Now absolute truths necessarily mandates a God, if you have an absolute truth you must have a God. It was stated for example that the periodic table was an absolute truth, well a periodic table isn’t even true, the periodic table is an object, statements about the periodic table are true or false, but to say that the periodic table is true is like saying my car is true (it’s not even true or false). Another mistake is calling evolution false, but evolution is neither true nor false, evolution is not a proposition. Evolution is consistent or inconsistent with other known data, but it is not itself a proposition that we can call true of false. In any case, it’s only propositions which are true or false and again propositions are language dependent, which is mind dependent and the entire system needs to exist in order for any truth to exist. So to say that any truth is absolute is wrong, and people will ask (like Sye) and say, “is it absolutely true that there are no absolute truths?” and you can say, “no it’s systemically true as all truths are, there are no absolute truths.” All truths are systemic, they’re relative to a system, don’t be fooled by the lingo to say, well is it an absolute truth to say there are no absolute truths. The answer is no since no absolute truth exist obviously, all truths are systemic, therefore there are no absolute truths. That there are no absolute truths again is a systemic truth itself, it’s not an absolute truth.

    Lets consider before there was mind, perhaps before the earth existed, it’s a possible circumstance that there was no minds at all during this time. In this possible circumstance there were no truths at all. Nothing was true at a time when no minds existed, even if everything else existed. After theres mind then we can create statements about that period in time before minds existed, but these statements would be belief statements that all this even ever took place.

    So for us to talk about absolute truth is what I consider the most dangerous world view that exists. It’s the hall mark of the suicide bomber, this is not just the hallmark of religion itself, but the real strict fundamentalists that will talk about Gods, truth and absolute truth. The core root of dogma is absolutism, and if atheists are to appose anything they should appose absolute truth and peoples world views first and foremost above beyond all the God talk. As soon as you here and come across this form of absolute ideology then let them know, and particularly when applied to morality (when they talk about absolute moral truth). Morals are subjective and a matter of belief, individual opinion, so on, and the religious try to take this idea of absolute truth directly into morality, which is when they really cross the line into the frightening. When we talk about an absolute truth other wise, lets say its something like gravity, that’s not so much of a concern, you don’t’ see suicide bombers based on such things. However you will when absolute truth is combined with morality.

    So look out for absolute truth, it is the singe most identifying characteristic of any religion or world view that should be apposed by atheists, it is scary stuff.

  10. andrew,

    Good points. Recently, I went to a talk in which the theme is to "ask the toughest questions about Christianity". This interests me. What this really translates to is, "only ask questions that are within culturally acceptable bounds, i.e. never question whether Christianity is true or challenge central doctrines". My friend Steve and I are the only ones that ask such questions, and we get scouls afterwards-never challenges, mind you-just scouls. Anyhow, the last of these meetings was on Moral Absolutism, and the speaker errected a strawman about relative morals...I'm sure you can imagine what was said. I allowed a few softballs to be wacked out of the park and then asked, "You claim to have a basis of absolute morals. Now, on something as basic as taking the life of another, according to moral absolutism, as you defined it, taking another's life should either be right or wrong. So which is it? Are we to never take another life, or are we allowed to take lives?" His voice squeaked as he stumbled to gain his composure. He side-stepped the question for a couple minutes, and one of my other friends, J, interupted him and simply asked him to answer the question, which should be easy. He said he didn't have an answer. We pointed out that even his morality is relative, because the morality of killing is relative to the situation. I was hoping some of the Christians in the room would point this out, so I held my tongue to see if there were any true "skeptics" among the believers.

    Funny, every month that they have this, Steve and I stump them every time we go. The speaker studied at UVA, Cambridge and Princeton theological seminary. It is so easy to deconstruct theological arguments it is amazing that we actually give space at universities for theology programs. Theology should be offered at private bible colleges. It is not a subject.

  11. "I was in a bus, handing out million dollar tracts, and everybody enjoyed them. The bus driver asked me to drive the bus, and I while I was doing it, I told him how wonderful it would be to drive a bus in heaven because the streets are of gold. He agreed with me!"

    I just spit pop at my monitor.

    Thanks, Ranting.

  12. :)

    This is a fun game...alright...who am I?


    I used to be an uneliever... So, I think I am authority over all atheists. If you can see by my conversations, I actually know NOTHING OF SCIENCE. I make quirky remarks about people finding bones and proclaiming them to be our grandfathers. I think I'm funny, but really...I'm a poor sad gawd-fearin' man...

    No? Well, it's (Shiver)Curtis!!!

  13. Okay...I almost just soiled myself reading all of these posts.

    You guys are hysterical!

  14. Great post, RS!

    Jesus says trees are green because God made them for us to enjoy this pleasant color.
    When I look outside my window, I see green trees, and they are pleasant.
    Why do the sinful atheists persistently ignore this TRUTH?
    I pray for them.

    P.S. What I wrote above is true. I agree with it.
    P.P.S. Some arrogant atheist once told me that some stupid chemical I can't even pronounce makes trees green, and that we only find the color pleasant because we evolved in this environment. How insane is THAT? thos scientists need to get out more, maybe then they could see how circular their arguments are.


Unlike Ray we don't censor our comments, so as long as it's on topic and not spam, fire away.

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.