God is not dead: My thoughts

I hardly do movie reviews. It is hard to do that. It means talking about dressing, scenes and so on and you will be spared such sorry details.

There are bad movies and this is one of them. It starts as a philosophy lecture with the most bogus of philosophers one can ever think of. I don’t think it one can go below Jeffrey Radisson. He starts a philosophy lecture by

demanding that his students sign a declaration that “God is dead” to get a passing grade.

We have student Josh who tells the prof to take a rope and agrees to challenge the professor and show god is not dead. He is given a few minutes to present the case for god after every lecture. He makes the prof the prosecutor and starts his argument for god by bringing up the BB cosmology. When asked to respond to the question who created god, he commits a fallacy of special pleading to which the professor doesn’t respond. How would a professor of philosophy worth the name not point such out? The only thing the prof does is quote Hawking.

After this first debate, Radisson is  harassing Josh for showing he is a jackass. WTF! As a prof I would be happy if my students challenged me. Josh is booted by the girlfriend. Poor boy!

There is a foreign student who calls the father to seek his opinion on the matter. The father says if the professor says god is dead, then god is dead. Then we have the Muslim family and their daughter who is becoming Christian. You should watch to see what happens to her!

There are irrelevant scenes that pander to religion. They could have been omitted and still we would not miss them. For example the scene where we have Rev. David renting a car. Who cares really? Or the professor being shown the door by his religious girlfriend. Radisson is not only a horrible teacher, he is horrible in a relationship. What type of man makes fun of his girlfriend when he has invited members of faculty at his for dinner? Especially when the lady has taken her time to make the dinner. She should have left him sooner!

We have in the second debate the question of where life originates. And we get a small lecture in evolution. In his answer Josh tells us life is because god said life should be and the good professor just stands there dumbfounded like he is hearing all these for the first time.

In the last debate, we have Josh take us through the problem of evil and there is a real confrontation between him and Radisson. He tells his lecturer the class is not a philosophy lecture but a class in anti-theism. It would be hard to disagree. And we know Radisson is an atheist because he lost his mother when he was 12. Who wrote the script for this movie really?

As I said at the beginning, a worse movie on the atheism/theism debate could not be thought. A worse atheist philosopher could not be imagined than Radisson. The movie is not even fun to watch!

Questions for atheists

I love questions, especially those I can answer I don’t know.

Below are a set found at CARM. Some atheist has already offered his answers here.

  • How would you define atheism?

A lack of belief in god[s]/ deities

  • Do you act according to what you believe (there is no God) in or what you don’t believe in (lack belief in God)?

The question of whether god is or is not little affects how I wake up in the morning or cross the street.

  • Do you think it is inconsistent for someone who “lacks belief” in God to work against God’s existence by attempting to show that God doesn’t exist?

How would I even do that?

  • How sure are you that your atheism properly represents reality?

I wouldn’t be one if it didn’t represent reality for me.

  • How sure are you that your atheism is correct?

I could be wrong. Am open to persuasion.

  • How would you define what truth is?

There are no truths and this statement is false.

  • Why do you believe your atheism is a justifiable position to hold?

It is falsifiable. You only need to present god and I will change my mind even am convicted that what you have presented me with is a god.

Am a naturalist

  • Do you affirm or deny that atheism is a worldview?  Why or why not?

Atheism is not a worldview. It is a lack of belief

  • Not all atheists are antagonistic to Christianity but for those of you who are, why the antagonism?

Not just Christianity, but all religions that think they have a right to impose their beliefs in the public square. Religion is a private matter and it should remain so.

  • If you were at one time a believer in the Christian God, what caused you to deny his existence?

I became too clever to continue buying the BS.

  • Do you believe the world would be better off without religion?

IS this a trick question?

  • Do you believe the world would be better off without Christianity?

To an extent yes. We would have Apollo, Zeus and other deities fighting amongst themselves for our adoration and not the Inquisition and witch hunts among others.

  • Do you believe that faith in a God or gods is a mental disorder?

I just know it is a failure to apply oneself rationally and critically to what they believe.

What other way is there of acquiring knowledge? Maybe you could suggest.

You commit a mistake in your question. You claim to know there is a god and that it is immaterial. How do you know this?

  • Do we have any purpose as human beings?


  • If we do have purpose, can you as an atheist please explain how that purpose is determined?

It has nothing to do with my atheism.

  • Where does morality come from?

What do you think?

  • Are there moral absolutes?

Do you know of any?

  • If there are moral absolutes, could you list a few of them?

I didn’t say there were any.

  • Do you believe there is such a thing as evil?  If so, what is it?

Yes. Anything that I don’t like being done to me.

  • If you believe that the God of the Old Testament is morally bad, by what standard do you judge that he is bad?

By the standards of a reasonable person.

  • What would it take for you to believe in God?

Please tell me what god is so I can know it. Belief will not be necessary when I know.

  • What would constitute sufficient evidence for God’s existence?

We must first agree on what god is to know whether god is

  • Must this evidence be rationally based, archaeological, testable in a lab, etc., or what?

Of course it must be rational. Why would you want it any other way?

  • Do you think that a society that is run by Christians or atheists would be safer?  Why?

A society run by reasonable people is a safer one.

  • Do you believe in free will?  (free will being the ability to make choices without coersion). 

If that is your decision, yes.

  • If you believe in free will, do you see any problem with defending the idea that the physical brain, which is limited and subject to the neuro-chemical laws of the brain, can still produce free will choices?

This is not what you defined above. But to say more, our choices are not free.

  • If you affirm evolution and that the universe will continue to expand forever, then do you think it is probable that given enough time, brains would evolve to the point of exceeding mere physical limitations and become free of the physical and temporal and thereby become “deity” and not be restricted by space and time?  If not, why not?

I understand evolution and what the theory explains. I don’t think it has an aim like the one you suggest. If that were to happen, those beings will not be Homo sapiens. You seem to be obsessed with deities. Do you have some knowledge the rest of us don’t.

  • If you answered the previous question in the affirmative, then aren’t you saying that it is probable that some sort of God exists?