Shockofgod Debunked – Proof and Evidence that Atheism is Accurate and Correct

by Godlessons on August 14, 2010

Well, I’m going to give this guy his continued 15 minutes of fame.  Shockofgod on YouTube has asked, albeit a long long time ago, for atheists to show “proof and evidence that atheism is accurate and correct”, and I’m going to give it to him.

I know it feeds his ego, but the insanity of the question, and the number of people that think it’s a good question compel me to respond.

First of all, I am not responding to something that has received no acknowledgment for all this time.  The original video was out about a year ago, but the hype about it has just recently come to a head because someone pretended to be shockofgod and caused some drama about the video.  Since that happened, all sorts of believers, especially Christians, are assuming that he has some sort of point.  They actually believe that atheists can’t show evidence that atheism is correct.  I will show that they are all wrong too.

Now, there is the standard answer that shows that his question is foolish.  For instance, show me that not collecting stamps is accurate and correct.  Show me that not believing in leprechauns is accurate and correct.  Nobody would think these are questions worth dealing with whatsoever, yet atheism is held to a different standard despite it being fundamentally no different than not believing in leprechauns.

Even if it were a belief, it would be a nonsense question to ask, “Can you give me proof and evidence that theism is accurate and correct?”  How is belief in God accurate and correct.  I would be just as much of a moron by asking that question.

Why Asking the Question is Nonsense

It’s not the belief that can be called accurate or correct, because if you believe in God, obviously it is accurate and correct to call yourself a theist, but saying that belief in God is accurate or correct is a nonsense statement, since the only possible question you could be addressing with it is whether or not you believe, not whether or not what you believe is true.

I believe in my brother.  Can I say that is accurate and correct?  The statement, “I believe in my brother” is accurate and correct, because that reflects my belief, but that statement says nothing about the belief itself.

Do I actually have a brother?  That is a different thing completely.  Let’s say for a moment that I don’t have a brother, does that make the belief in my brother not accurate and correct?  I do have a brother though, and I can produce him and he will tell you that he is my brother.  He can show you his birth certificate showing that his parents are the same as my parents.  My mother and father are still alive, and can attest to being the parents of both of us, so does that make whether or not I believe in him accurate and correct?  No!  It makes no difference.

Saying that I believe in my brother is totally different than whether or not my brother exists.  I could be insane, and believe in a brother I never had, but the fact would remain that I still believe he exists, so saying that I believe in my brother would be accurate and correct, and the evidence would be that I tell you that’s what I believe.  On the other hand, if I were to say to you that my brother does exist, that is a claim that I could show evidence for.

Atheism Requires no Evidence

I could tell you I don’t believe in God, and I would be an atheist right there.  I don’t have to believe in evolution.  I don’t have to believe the universe is billions of years old.  I could believe that the earth is 6-10 thousand years old like young earth creationists do, and I could still be an atheist.

Atheism doesn’t say that God doesn’t exist.  Atheism says, “I don’t believe in God.”  If I were to say I am an atheist, and God doesn’t exist, you could then tell me to provide proof and evidence.

Similarly, theism, on its own, doesn’t require evidence.  Theism just says that you believe in God, not that God exists.  If you were to say that you’re a theist and God does exist, that’s when I could tell you to provide proof and evidence.

So, your question to atheists is only valid if they are saying that God doesn’t exist, but not if they are saying that they have not found any reason to believe that God does exist.

The Elusive Proof and Evidence that Atheism is Accurate and Correct

Now, considering the question, and how it’s framed, I can only imagine that you mean one thing.  You don’t believe that I don’t believe in God.  Since that’s the only way your question makes any sense, here it is.

I deny the holy spirit!

That should be good enough to show I don’t believe in your god.  If I thought that your god existed, that line alone would damn me to hell for eternity.  I’ve heard about hell.  It doesn’t sound pleasant.

As for all the other possible gods that have been created by men over the years, even though none of their followers would admit they were made by men either, I deny them too.  I don’t believe in any single one of them, and I have no reason to believe that they are any more likely to be true than the flying spaghetti monster.

That is your evidence that my lack of belief is genuine.  I don’t know how better to show it to you.

  • http://portableatheist.wordpress.com Paul

    I read through this, expecting you to try and provide scientific proof that God doesn’t exist.

    I’m glad you didn’t try. You showed the absurdity of the video in what was probably the most appropriate and appealing manner possible: through humor.

    thank you. I got to “elusive proof”, and shot Fanta out of my nose.

  • http://godlessons.com Godlessons

    Well, the question is dumb. I know what he wants. He wants proof there is no God. If he had asked that, nobody would have given him the time of day. He framed the question in such a way that it made no sense whatsoever though.

    He starts out wanting “Proof AND evidence”. If you have proof, you have used evidence to get it. It makes it a rather redundant thing to ask for. “Accurate and correct” has exactly the same problem. If it is accurate, when it comes to explaining a thing, it is also correct, and vise versa.

    The fact is, I thought I was being unique, since I hadn’t seen anything like this prior to posting this, but as soon as I was done, I saw that DLandonCole on Youtube posted a video with an almost identical point to this post a few hours before. He does a much better job of being funny than I did though.

    Anyway, thanks for appreciating it.

  • Lewben9001

    I liked your response, however I do see one issue with it, and that would be the point at which you say

    “If I were to say I am an atheist, and God doesn’t exist, you could then tell me to provide proof and evidence.”

    the reason that I don’t feel that this statement is true is that the inexistence of God is UNprovable, not because there definitely IS a God, but simply because it is impossible, from a logical perspective, to really PROVE the inexistence of anything. However, judging from the intellectual capacity of this retort, I’d imagine you understood that anyway, and simply used that example for the sake of repitition, I’m just making sure. But anyway, I really liked the way you tackled this, good job!

    • http://godlessons.com Godlessons

      Thanks. I did know the issue with not logically being able to prove the non-existence of things. I actually believe it is logically impossible to prove the existence of things also, at least things other than our own minds. Because of that, I see little difference between asserting the non-existence of things not evident and asserting the existence of things ultimately not evident. Both take equal amounts of faith.

  • Haekel69

    If an atheist states that God doesn’t exist, he/she is not exempt for providing some sort of proof to back up such a claim.  The “question” (What proof and evidence do you have that proves atheism is accurate and correct?) can’t be answered because there isn’t any proof or evidence the atheist stance is accurate or correct.  An atheist believes God doesn’t exist based on faith.  The fact that he/she hasn’t looked or confirmed is another issue, but remains for the atheist to address.

    • http://godlessons.com Godlessons

      Congratulations for the dumb ass comment of the day award!!!

      Atheism requires no evidence.  Atheism is not a claim of knowledge.  Theism also requires no evidence, because it is similarly not a claim of knowledge.The question is stupid.  It would be like me asking you, give me proof and evidence that you believe your mother exists.  You could show me evidence that your mother exists, but that doesn’t demonstrate that you believe it.  You really could only tell me that you believe it and call that evidence.Further, I say “I believe there is no god.”  I don’t have to support that statement.  The statement I would have to support is if I said, “There is no god.”  You see the difference there?  The former makes one an atheist.  The latter is no different than you morons saying, “God exists.”, and requires some level of evidence.Next time, read the post you comment on before making me suffer through your stupidity.

  • Malay Atheist

    Why do people bother? Ignore the fool. He can’t beat his own challenge.

    • http://godlessons.com Godlessons

      Because at the time I wrote this, nobody was pointing these things out.

Previous post:

Next post: