A challenge for theists - Pascal's Wager in reverse?

Question

Try this:
1. Read the God Delusion by Dawkins, The Demon-Haunted World by Sagan and Atheist Universe by Mills
2. Read the Old Testament
3. Study everything you can about evolution and physics
4. Go to the web-site called the Skeptics Annotated Bible

What do you have to lose? Is anyone willing to take the challenge?

rp - There is no time limit. Knock of each one as you can. Happy studying.

rp - Sorry for the typo. Knock "off" is what I meant.

Little warrior - I tried that four years ago. So far it hasn't worked. Your turn now.

Answer 1

If you want me to do this,,then can I ask of you to do the same..I ask is,,get the bible out hold in your hands and pray and ask the Lord to show you the hidden meanings in the word with a sencere heart,not doubting that it won't work and then ask the Lord to show you what you need to read to believe,and go from there..
I have no problem reading any of that stuff at all,,I believe there are people who don't believe and that wisdom does not come from man..
So if I accept you have to also,under my terms as you have asked me too.

Answer 2

I like this one:

Atheist's Wager:

"You should live your life and try to make the world a better place for your being in it, whether or not you believe in God. If there is no God, you have lost nothing and will be remembered fondly by those you left behind. If there is a benevolent God, he may judge you on your merits coupled with your commitments, and not just on whether or not you believed in him."

I am an atheist and I've already read The God Delusions but I've added Atheist Universe to my long list of books to read and the Bible is on that list as well. So while I am already not theist, I'll take your challenge anyway simply because I'd love to obtain more knowledge.

Answer 3

I am an atheist. I have read the Old Testament a number of times and it is one of the most poorly written, incoherent compilations of unrelated primitive texts in the canon of world literature.

Haven't gotten around to the books you mentioned yet; but might I also suggest the following:

"God is NOT Great: How Religion Poisons Everything" by Christopher Hitchens

"Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon" by Daniel C. Dennett

I have spent a good deal of my life examining evolution and it appears to be the most complete and accurate description of the process of adaptation by living organisms in response to changes in the environment over time. I have also spent quite some time reading about physics. All night conversations over coffee about the strange and wonderful world of subatomic particles are quite "mind-expanding." And guess what? The universe never needed a "cosmic Santa Claus" in order to be!

I look forward to examining the Skeptic Ann. Bible. I bet that it will be a hoot. Good luck getting any believers to follow up your challenge. I'm not sure they realize the earth is round yet.

Answer 4

I'm already an atheist, so I'm not sure I count.


1. I've read parts of Dawkins's book. I haven't bought it because I normally don't buy hardcover books by people not named Murakami (unless textbooks count, but I've been out of school for a while). What I read wasn't that bad, but I can see why it provokes a defensive reaction in theists. I would think that any response to it would come either from the more moderate theists who read with an open mind, or else somewhere down the road for the more fundamentalist theists who have a bit of a crisis of faith at some point.

Unlike what some guy on this thread said, it's hardly the best book on the topic of atheism, but it is the most popular and most accessible.

I find that some of these books that discuss the existence of gods tend to go over many theists heads, since they usually don't get *why* it's a bad idea to assume supernaturalist metaphysics, nor do they appreciate being told that dualism is not very fashionable.


2. Did that a while ago. I might reread the good parts later, but I doubt I'll ever torture myself with the whole thing again. Parts are useful, and parts are more dry than Ayn Rand.


3. I love physics (currently doing biophysics research, though my project is theoretical and mathematical rather than experimental--I'm designing tools for the experimentalists), and I've recently read a little on cosmology. It's interesting stuff, though I don't have the physics background I would need to make sense of all of it. I might make some time for mathematical physics next fall, when I start grad school, but I'm probably going to spend more time learning pure math so I'll have more good stuff to apply to natural science problems when I finish.

Evolution is fun, and I studied the basics in college, but I haven't had time to go very in-depth to the point where I could do research in the field. I figure it's less important for me to know some of the details, since I know enough to know *that* it works as well as *why* it works. I actually thought it was more interesting to see it in other bioscience classes I took in college. In the genetics unit of my neuroscience class, for instance, we looked at a few instances of genes that had duplicated and then split off down separate evolutionary tracks. That we find this sort of thing a century after Darwin makes the fact of evolution pretty obvious.

4. I take issue with this one, though. I've read some of it, and I have to say that its commentary is very uneven. What it seems to want to do at every turn is attack a particular view of the Bible as strictly literal and completely moral. Since I first encountered the site long after I'd given that view up, I didn't quite mesh with its style very well. There is plenty we can learn about the history of culture and religion through reading some of the parts of the Bible that get dismissed as absurd, since those parts are only absurd if you actually believe they happened.

I think reading and studying the Bible is a lot like reading and studying Nietzsche, though in the end Nietzsche was much better at philosophy. It's best not to jump on every wrong thing either said, instead taking things in their historical context and learning what we can about that context through the text itself. I mean, Nietzsche could be a misogynist jerk at times, but that doesn't mean he didn't have anything important to say. It just means Nietzsche wasn't divine (contra Foucault). Same with the Bible.

Answer 5

I just started re-reading "The Demon-Haunted World"....I had forgotten how entertaining it is! It's funny -- I'd been feeling a bit down and disappointed about Carl Sagan recently, ever since I found out he was such a proponent of smoking pot. You'd think a guy that smart would have more sense than to start killing off his brain cells that way! But working my way through the chapter "The Fine Art of Baloney Detection" has helped to reaffirm my faith in the man....

Answer 6

I've read The God Delusion, I'm working on Demon-Haunted World and I'd love to read Atheist Universe!

I've read the OT and I've "studied" evolution in that I've looked it up extensively online.

I love SAB!

P.S. I'm an atheist but I WAS a Catholic, so I thought maybe it was ok to answer.

Answer 7

I would rather not read a book named the demon-haunted, and Ive looked for the God delusion in the local library, not there.

I dont care even if the bible is fake, religion is something I feel and no book can change that.

Answer 8

I'm just wondering if you woke up one morning and decided to make yourself feel better by putting yourself in an authoritarion role and authoring a challenge. I guess I just don't get your point other than you wanting to prove something. Which is vague at best. This just kind of seems like a very childish post to me. I'm so sorry if I've offended you - and I probably shouldn't have answered at all. This sort of thing really isn't worth our (those of us whom profess to embrace Christianity) time to study. I am directed to study my Bible, my God and my Faith. What you've posted, really holds no bearing on anyone's opinion other than your own. Sorry. katiefish <><

Answer 9

1. Read Dawkins - found him to be immature, not interested to read anything else since he's often reported to be the best you have.

2. Read OT - at least a little everyday. What's you're point?

3. Am studying as much as I can get my hands on. The more I read about evo, the less I agree with it.

4. SAB is a joke and not worth anyone's time.

Next "challenge".....

Answer 10

And WHO are you? Remind me, please. I don't seem to recall seeing your name among Pascal, Newton , Einstein.

Not even among Dawkins, Sagan and Mills.

But you may want to read

1. Darwin's Black Box by Michael Behe
2. Mere Creation by William Dembski
3. Evolution: ATheory in Crisis by Michael Denton
4. Darwin on Trial by Phillip Johnson
5. Bones of Contention by Marvin Lubenow
6. Shattering the Myths of Darwinism by Richard Milton

(They can all be obtained from Amazon.com This is NOT an advertisement for Amazon.com)


They may help you to make an INFORMED decision.