From: Count Lithium von Chloride <n...@home.com>
Subject: Re: Proof of not-God
Date: 1999/07/05
Message-ID: <37812026.1039982@news.mco.bellsouth.net>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 497511585
Approved: tskirv...@crhc.uiuc.edu
X-Mail-Path: amber.crhc.uiuc.edu!alpha.math.uiuc.edu!dfw7-1.relay.mail.uu.net!mail1.bellsouth.net!news3.mco.bellsouth.net!tski...@math.uiuc.edu
References: <19990705154851.14822.00004059@ng-fi1.aol.com>
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: 209.214.36.105
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 05 Jul 1999 17:31:18 EDT
X-Original-Date: Mon, 05 Jul 1999 21:31:03 GMT
X-Group-Homepage: <URL:http://www.uiuc.edu/~tskirvin/hpo/>
X-Original-To: humanities-philo...@moderators.uu.net
X-Modbot: Mackie the HPO ModBot <tski...@uiuc.edu>
Processed-By: Mackie the HPO ModBot <tski...@uiuc.edu>
X-Submissions-To: tskirv...@crhc.uiuc.edu
X-Original-Path: not-for-mail
X-Trace: news3.mco 931210278 209.214.36.105 (Mon, 05 Jul 1999 17:31:18 EDT)
Organization: VeriMod (<URL:http://www.uiuc.edu/~tskirvin/verimod/>)
X-Auth: PGPMoose V1.1 PGP humanities.philosophy.objectivism iD8DBQE3gSTF6ocVLX0FGHsRAh0hAKCSjM30U90Ooi6+HBcqLjCuriB5egCfY472 +yz/zIFqVTno8n6U1fs+/BE= =siCL
Newsgroups: humanities.philosophy.objectivism

On 5 Jul 1999 19:49:07 GMT, Jesus07312 <jesus...@aol.com> wrote:

>Hello, I heard about how Ayn & friends were going to excommunicate Murray
>Rothbard because his wife was christian, unless she renounced her beliefs and
>turned to objectivism, or unless Murray disowned his wife. Appearantly,
>Nathanial Brandon "proved" that Christianity was false to her, yet she still
>held onto her beliefs, making her "evil."

>I was curious, does anyone know how exactly Nathaniel went about doing this?
>Or, does anyone know any way to prove that Christianity is false? If so, could
>someone offer such a proof to me? I would appreciate it very much. Thanks.

I don't know if it's possible to prove the non-existence of God, as
even if it were practical to examine every last atom in the unirverse
and in so doing failed to turn up a god this would still not be proof
of the non-existence of a supernatural being, as a theist would simply
maintain that God exists in a form which cannot be studied or
messured.

But it is demonstrably provable that if a god should exist then he
wants man to believe that he doesn't, i.e., he wants man to be
atheist:

If a God did exist, then he must have given man the faculty of reason
for one purpose--namely, to use it--yet upon using it on the question
of the existence of a God, man by his use of reason would have no
choice but to conclude that a God does not exist. Thus, even if a God
did exist, he wants man to believe that he doesn't. Quite ironically
then, even if God exists, an atheist would stand a better chance of
getting into Heaven than a theist. As the theist believes in something
for which he has no evidence for--against the wish of God who gave him
the faculty of reason so as to be used. Whereas the atheist has used
his faculty of reason for which God had given him. Thus, prudence
requires that one should not believe in anything supernatural--as
reason dictates God would intend it, should he actually exist (absurd
as the notion of that possibility is).
	Whereas I have not proved that a God does not exist, what I
have proved is that if a God does exist, he wants man to believe that
he doesn't (along with extrapolating the implications thereof). Thus,
theists are found to be the true heathens.


���

--Count Lithium von Chloride, ushering in the new era

E-mail: vonch...@yahoo.com