Convert Me

Con has said in his last rebuttal, and in the comments, that he will allow me to start over mid-debate, since he has changed the resolution and over-limited the Pro. But before I take him up on that, let's satirize what has happened in this debate up to this point since comedy is the only light in which it can now be appreciated. I call this piece: "Gon' Fishing: Bait and Switch" By WrathofGod Score by Andrew Lloyd Weber [SEE VIDEO HERE] http://www.xtranormal.com... ===New Pro Case=== Ok, now that I have got that out of my system, let's try again. I only took this debate because I believed it was straight up Atheism vs pick your poison. That left me with enough ground to say that when you compare those two, Christianity is the most reasonable. Now, with Sieben's new resolution, I must re-write a case where I present "a reasonable argument with logical or empirical proof. For example, I believe in quantum mechanics. Not because my knowledge will ever be useful, but because its reasonable." (see his conclusion) **So, I will now argue for why Christianity is more reasonable than quantum physics, and thus Sieben should convert.** 1) Einstein Believed God was more Reasonable than Quantum Mechanics According to American Public Media's series on "Einstein's God", Einstein held a view of God mostly shaped by his Jewish culture, though also not held captive by it. To quote the man himself from a letter he penned in 1927: "I cannot conceive of a personal God who would directly influence the actions of individuals or would sit in judgment on creatures of his own creation. I cannot do this in spite of the fact that mechanistic causality has, to a certain extent, been placed in doubt by modern science. My religiosity consists in a humble admiration of the infinitely superior spirit that reveals itself in the little that we, with our weak and transitory understanding, can comprehend of reality." The fact that Einstein believed in a God that can equally be accepted by many in the Christian community is not as fascinating as is the fact that Einstein also rejected Niel Bohr's theory of quantum mechanics, ironically enough invoking God in his argument saying: "I do not believe that God plays dice with the universe." In the interview, Krista Tippett elucidates Einstein's rejection: "Einstein found this idea unacceptable. He drew the closest thing he had to a theology from his reverence for the writings of the 17th-century Dutch philosopher Baruch Spinoza. Spinoza described God's superior intelligence manifest in the determined harmonious order of nature. And Einstein made his most famous quip about God as he disputed the disorderly universe of quantum physics. He said, repeatedly, 'I do not believe that God plays dice with the universe.'"[5] Because Einstein believed in an arguably Spinozan and Jew-ish version of God, and also rejected Quantum Mechanics, Sieben should follow in the Father of Relativity's footsteps and choose theism. Should he desire to continue believing Quantum Mehanics, he may, but he should also go ahead and accept God. 2) Quantum Physics is Absurd, but Luckily so is Christianity Richard Fenyman was an American physicist known for his work in the path integral formulation of quantum mechanics, the theory of quantum electrodynamics and assisted in the development of the atomic bomb. He won the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1965, and is arguably one of the most equipped men in history to explain quantum mechanics. [1] In his book "QED: The Strange Theory of Light and Matter.", he elucidated quantum theory saying it deals with: "Nature as She is—absurd."[2] Fenyman isn't the first physicist to notice the absurdity of quantum physics, and he's not the first to stick with it anyway. Unlike Einstein, Fenyman clung to quantum mechanics in spite of its absurdity, and perhaps even because of it. This has parallels to important Christian thinking as well. 2nd Century Church Father Tertullian of Carthage believed in Christianity precisely because it was absurd. He believed that because God is "super" natural, his imprint in the natural world should appear to be impossible, illogical, and irrational. Considering such Christian paradoxes as the God-man Jesus and the love of one's enemies, Tertullian penned: "The Son of God was born: there is no shame, because it is shameful. And the Son of God died: it is wholly credible, because it is unsound. And, buried, He rose again: it is certain, because impossible." [3] Because the Godman Jesus is absurd to logic, yet was observed by eyewitnesses (just as quantum physics), Tertullian argues we must believe it, despite its unreasonableness. Kierkegaard, the dutch philosopher and devout Christian, continued Tertullian's thought in his consideration of subjectivity: "The absurd is precisely by its objective repulsion the measure of the intensity of faith in inwardness. Suppose a man who wishes to acquire faith; let the comedy begin. He wishes to have faith, but he wishes also to safeguard himself by means of an objective inquiry and its approximation-process. What happens? With the help of the approximation-process the absurd becomes something different: it becomes probable, it becomes increasingly probable, it becomes extremely and emphatically probable. Now he is ready to believe it, and he ventures to claim for himself that he does not believe as shoemakers and tailors and simple folk believe, but only after long deliberation. Now he is ready to believe it; and lo, now it has become precisely impossible to believe it. Anything that is almost probable, or probable, or extremely and emphatically probable, is something he can almost know, or as good as know, or extremely and emphatically almost know-but it is impossible to believe. For the absurd is the object of faith, and the only object that can be believed."[4] The conclusion here being that many Christians have believed in Christ precisely because his story defies their understanding of the natural world. They see this as evidence of God's supernatural fingerprint. Sieben is able to believe in something that even Nobel Prize winning Physicists say is "absurd" and illogical, why not continue this pattern and choose Christianity? Since Quantum Mechanics is reasonable enough for him to follow despite its absurdity, I offer to baptize him into the absurdity of Christianity this weekend. Shouldn't be that big a stretch. 3) Christianity not useful? No worries, neither is Quantum Mechanics. According to Sieben's own opinion of Quantum Mechanics, he believes in it "Not because [it] will ever be useful, but because its reasonable." I'm glad he said that. Because now I don't have to do the laborious process of proving that Christianity will get him to heaven or in any way better his life. See, if Quantum Mechanics is worthy of belief without requiring usefulness, Christianity is due that same distinction. So, no more pesky concerns from Sieben about not being able to "prove" Heaven or Hell, or even theology for matter. No, Christianity can be accepted with complete uselessless to Sieben, so long as it appears as reasonable as Quantum Mechanics, which, due to the arguments above, I have demonstrated it is. ===Conclusion=== Understanding Sieben's love for the absurdity of quantum physics has helped explain his debating style in the first few rounds. Now that he has offered to change the resolution and allow me a new case, I have accepted and proposed that Christianity may be just as acceptable to him as theoretical quantum mechanics, a standard he offered in his conclusion. I urge voters to choose Pro, because deep down, you know you want to. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org... [2] http://en.wikipedia.org... [3] "De Carna Christi V" pg 4 [4] Kierkegaard's "Postscript". [5] http://being.publicra...