Atheist Detector … November 4, 2013

Penn Jillette starts his book God No! with a litmus test to find out if you might be an atheist. It is in the form of a simple question: “If god (however you perceive him/her/it) told you to kill your child — would you?” He goes on to state that if your answer is no, you are an atheist. If your answer isBible_Abraham_sacraficing_Isaac yes, please reconsider, he requests.

If I were to take this simple litmus test I would preface it with three conditions. One, I would make it clear that the question is not a question for god to answer. Other than the commandment, he is not involved. Two, I would insist that the person who is asked knows clearly that the question is not for his/her pastor or other church leader to delve over. The question is solely for the person asked, to answer. Finally, three, the individual is absolutely sure that god is the one making the commandment. The last one is to insure that the person being tested does not say it is satan asking or some other demon. If the person states that god would not give such an order, that avoids the question being asked and answers the question of whether god would order such a killing, instead.

If the person answers no then it is obvious they do not believe. After all, god is omnipotent and cannot be trifled with. It could be a ticket straight to hell. The person who actually believes wouldHell not take such a risk. Most likely such a person is simply giving “lip-service” to belief anyway.

If the answer is yes, and if they are sincere then they are a true believer. Unfortunately, this also makes them a monster. This person would be someone you would want to avoid. The reason for this is clear… if they would kill their child for god, monsterthen they would kill a non-relation without hesitation. They might even gleefully kill a non-related person, thanking god they did not have to kill kinfolk.  These are the kind of people who would force a plane full of innocent people fly into a building.

Now let’s carry this a little further, remembering the aforementioned conditions.  What if a pregnant mother, totally opposed to abortion, was told by god that the unborn child must not be born. Would she obey god? Would she, being totally opposed to abortionknife for any reason, seek an abortion? Would she take a carving knife to her abdomen in a gesture of faith and slice herself open, spilling the contents of her womb on the floor?

The United States may be said to be 70 percent christian, but I think in light of lip servicehow those people behave it is more than likely less than 10 percent in reality. Yes, I think 60 percent of the population are cherry cherriespickers. These people give god lip-service only. This is a good thing.


This entry was posted in atheism and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Atheist Detector … November 4, 2013

  1. Jon Teske says:

    The litmus test does not disconfirm the existence of a god, it just means that the refuser disagrees with the morality of a god that would command an immoral act. If anything, it would confirm the existence (subjectively and with only anecdotal evidence) of a god through this interaction.

  2. drenn1077 says:

    The test was not promoted as a means by which to disprove a god. What it does mean is that the “refuser” does not fear his/her god and evidently does not think that god liable or capable of punishing disobedience. What it most probably means is that the person who is the “refuser”, let’s call that person the disobedient, does not take their religion seriously and is giving lip-service. In this way the person can pose as a christian and take advantage of the social interaction such an affiliation provides. There is a long list of such things which can provide adequate reasoning for the conclusion that someone is not a christian. If they do not fear the repercussions of disobedience the likelihood of non-belief is great.

    What disproves god in the greatest respect is that the only evidence christians offer is that god’s non-existence cannot be proven. This opens a can of worms, in that, a host of imaginary creatures cannot be proven to not exist.

  3. Jon Teske says:

    “The test was not promoted as a means by which to disprove a god. What it does mean is that the “refuser” does not fear his/her god and evidently does not think that god liable or capable of punishing disobedience.”

    An atheist lacks a belief in a god(s), if I disobey my parents, it doesn’t mean I don’t believe they exist. If the disobedience occurs subsequent to an interaction, how can one then go on to say they don’t believe in the existence of a deity they just interacted with?

  4. drenn1077 says:

    Parents are not omnipotent.

    Sent from my Kindle Fire


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s