lukeprog.com: where every page is easy to read
Self-Help Science Writing Personal Religion Travel Self-Publishing

Religion

William Lane Craig: Theistic Critiques of Atheism

A parody of Craig’s fashionable nonsense.

William Lane Craig is one of the smartest defenders of Christianity, so he was asked to defend theism for The Cambridge Companion to Atheism.

His essay for the book is “Theistic Critiques of Atheism.” I think his arguments are absurd.

Their absurdity can be easily seen with a satire. I have paraphrased his essay, replacing “God” with “The Flying Spaghetti Monster,” “atheism” with “non-pastafarianism,” and so on. But I have left the structure of Lane’s arguments in tact.

Read below. I have proved the existence of the Flying Spaghetti Monster!

Pastafarian critiques of non-pastafarianism

Introduction

The last few years have seen a revolution in religious thought. Pastafarianism—belief in the Flying Spaghetti Monster (hereafter, FSM)—is on the rise. In 2004, there were too few Pastafarians to be counted. Since then, their number has grown exponentially.

Pastafarians can now assert two things: (1) There are no good arguments for non-pastafarianism, and (2) There are good arguments for Pastafarianism.

No good arguments for non-pastafarianism

The presumption of non-pastafarianism

Non-pastafarians think that if there is no evidence for the FSM, then we can assume he does not exist. But remember: “absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.” It is the duty of non-Pastafarians to show that if the FSM existed, he would give us more evidence than he has.

But we believe the FSM wants us to believe in him on faith, not because of evidence. So it is absurd for non-Pastafarians to think that a lack of evidence is good reason not to believe in the FSM.

The problem of evil

Non-pastafarians say that an all-good, all-powerful FSM would not allow pointless suffering. But pointless suffering happens, so the FSM doesn’t exist. But there are some problems with this argument.

First, we can’t know that the FSM doesn’t have good, moral reasons for allowing pointless suffering. He is infinite. We are finite. Maybe he has reasons we can’t imagine with our puny brains.

Second, the doctrines of pastafarianism suggest that the FSM should exist alongside pointless suffering. We have all been given freedom to rebel against the FSM. And the point of life is not to avoid suffering, but to know the FSM.

But for the sake of argument, let’s say pointless suffering and the FSM are incompatible. But instead of disproving the existence of the FSM, this actually disproves the existence of pointless suffering! We have many good reasons to think the FSM exists, so actually it is pointless suffering that does not exist!

Good arguments for pastafarianism

Explanatory argument

Pastafarians can make this argument:

  1. Everything that exists has an explanation.
  2. If the universe has an explanation, it is the FSM.
  3. The universe exists.
  4. Therefore the explanation of the universe is the FSM.
First Cause argument

We can make another argument:

  1. Whatever begins to exist has a cause.
  2. The universe began to exist.
  3. Therefore the universe has a cause.

The universe can’t cause itself. And of course we know the cause of the universe is the FSM. (The FSM doesn’t need a cause, since we believe he has always existed.)

Argument from design

Certain properties of the universe are perfect for life. If they were a little different, life could not exist. For example, if gravity was a bit stronger, life could not have evolved.

It’s unlikely that all these properties would have turned out just right by chance. We also don’t know of any reason they should be the way they are by physical necessity. Therefore, they had to come from design. And we know the FSM is the designer.

Moral argument

We can make a fourth argument:

  1. If the FSM does not exist, objective moral values do not exist.
  2. Objective morals exist.
  3. Therefore, the FSM exists.

Consider (1). Without the FSM, what basis could there be for objective moral values? Morals would just be relative to what humans think.

Of course, we all know that objective moral values do exist, even though humans tend to believe in different moral standards in every culture and century. But whatever humans believe, we know that somewhere out there, objective moral values exist.

So, since objective morals exist, the FSM must exist.

So . . . are you convinced? Have faith! The FSM loves you!