The reason the debate continues between atheists and creationists are that their official representatives have defined two sides of the debate which are both untenable.

Atheists maintain that material created life, and this is a reversal of basic scientific truth.

Creationists are usually Christians who are trying to prove the entirety of Christianity, and often don’t settle just to show how subtle energy patterns matter. Christians who control their desire to prove the whole lot of Christianity succeed the most, because Christianity is, as Chinese say, “a pure faith”, a guide for bhakti worship—but not a detailed science, medicine and philosophy as the Chinese, Hindu, and Tibetan traditions provide.

The most famous and skilled debater is William Lane Craig, and his technique is to show that belief in God is reasonable. The beta male Richard Dawkins refuses to debate him because obviously he’d lose. Dawkins can only argue with someone set on proving the existence of the Christian God and the truth of the entire Bible, because this is a weak position.

Issues with Fundamentalism
There are many Bibles, several additions, translations and interpretations. The Bible itself seems to be a collection of stories from the middle east and does not credit the original authors. The Bible does not deal with most fundamental issues of our day, like abortion, drug addiction, masturbation and faggotry. On other issues like circumcision, it says it is wrong, but does not make a strong or detailed enough injunction against it. On most issues of our day Buddhist and Hindu texts have clear, detailed explanations. For example there is a long Buddhist sutra on abortion, which details why it is wrong and what the penance is for doing it. Confusion in the Bible, the different versions, and the texts which it copies does not allow anyone to use it as the infallible word of God. It’s a moving target, and interpretations vary so much that, for example there are more than 250 kinds of protestantism in the United States.

The one most lacking argument

The one most lacking argument in the theism debate is not handled by Craig or anyone else, and it is the one true argument.

Most of the truths we learn in life are not learned in books or through logic alone. The average man does not decide what is true by checking if it is logically valid or not, or if there is some book written by some credentialed windbag to prove it. He simply “tries it on” and practices life with the idea that this might be true, and if it works, he believes it. This can be summed up as the practice and experience argument for God.

Here at the KBH we suggest that atheists voluntarily quit masturbation, sex and porn for two weeks, meditating on the idea that you will never have another deathspasm in your life, that you are above it, that there are no “hot women”, know that women’s butts have poop, blood and piss in them, set yourself to constructive work—i.e., “try on” the idea that you are a monk and you must accept his lifestyle. Keep a journal on how you feel, and talk to us in two weeks or more.

Try on celibacy, and you’ll know what people mean by God.