Unending dishonesty

Now that I've opened up this particular can of worms (proofs of God's existence) I am astonished by the unending dishonesty behind the websites that claim to have a proof. Based on the (admittedly small, but growing) sample of sites I've looked at they leave open only a few options for the people who write them. These people are either not smart enough to know that their proofs aren't proofs at all, or they're trying to deceive people on purpose. Which begs the question - why does God need these people to lie for him?

To help in these questions we at the Sentinel have put together a handy decision tree. This is designed for people who are proving God's existence to assess if their proof makes the cut or not. As we've said in previous posts, this is important, because if we teach people that poor quality thinking is ok, that can be damaging in all walks of life. No-one should get a free pass on this stuff.

Essentially anyone who is trying to prove God's existence should ask themselves if his/her argument for the proof of God suffers from one (ore more) of the following problems:

- you didn’t use logic
- you used bad logic*
- you didn’t use evidence
- you used only the evidence of Scripture, or
- you ignored other possible explanations for your evidence

If it does, then you have found yourself in the THE ZONE OF DUPLICITY! Oops.

Now that you know that your “proof” is not a proof, you should remove it from circulation. Otherwise you should ask yourself: "Why Does God Need Me To Lie For Him?" Not an easy one to answer...

If your proof passes all of those tests, then it has a fighting chance of being interesting, and we would love to hear about it. Let us know. We're waiting.

* Oh, and in case you don't know what "bad" logic is, there's a handy list of logical fallacies here, which you can use as reference.