Polygraphs say God doesn't exist

[Sylvanz]

Originally Posted by JoeBentley

I'll let Morbo handle this. Morbo?

Morbo: Polygraphs do not work that way!

Thank you Morbo.

I know polygraphs do not work, but who/what the blazes is "Morbo"? is it some reference that's gone over my head?

[Sandgroper]

Originally Posted by Sylvanz

I know polygraphs do not work, but who/what the blazes is "Morbo"? is it some reference that's gone over my head?

His full name is Morbo the Annihillator and he's the alien news anchor from Futurama.

[Sylvanz]

Originally Posted by Sandgroper

His full name is Morbo the Annihillator and he's the alien news anchor from Futurama.

Ah, thanks. I do like Futurama, but have obviously not seen that many episodes.

[Cervus]

Is anyone else annoyed by the Christian monotheism implied by the question "Does God exist?"

[crocoduck_hunter]

Originally Posted by Sylvanz

Ah, thanks. I do like Futurama, but have obviously not seen that many episodes.

Don't feel too bad. Morbo's name is almost never actually mentioned on the show, you'd have to pay attention to the ending credits to actually see it.

[E. Q. Taft]

Of course, another explanation for the polygraph results would be that God is tweaking with them must to mess with us.

[Spud Sabre]

Originally Posted by Cervus

Is anyone else annoyed by the Christian monotheism implied by the question "Does God exist?"

I'm not. When someone asks "Does God exist?" they have a definition of 'God' in mind already, which happens to be the Christian God in this case, although "Does God exist?" could apply to any monotheistic religion.

[crocoduck_hunter]

I think Cervus's point was that it's arrogant to think that if a god exists then it's automatically the one that you worship rather than the one described by a different religion or one that doesn't match the description of any religion at all.

[Spud Sabre]

Ah. That makes sense. Then "is Christianity correct?" would've been the proper question to ask.

[JoeBentley]

Originally Posted by crocoduck_hunter

I think Cervus's point was that it's arrogant to think that if a god exists then it's automatically the one that you worship rather than the one described by a different religion or one that doesn't match the description of any religion at all.

"Pascal's Wager" stumbles right out of the gate for the very same reason.

[crocoduck_hunter]

I actually used that as a reason that Pascal's Wager is not a valid reason to believe in a god for a persuasive speech I had to give back in May.

[AJ from Perth]

Originally Posted by JoeBentley

"Pascal's Wager" stumbles right out of the gate for the very same reason.

Hi JoeBentley,

I had fun with that one ages ago as part of an exercise in probability/game theory. Even in the original environment that it was originally conceived in it was a no-starter - everything I've read about the Christian God suggests he isn't too keep on people who only believe in him because it is a statistically safe wager.

If I remember correctly, we ended up deciding that it was actually a better argument for atheism when you considered the full spectrum of deities as generally "non-believers" suffer less than "heathens" in most religions that damn those sorts of people to a nasty life/afterlife.

- AJ from Perth