The Theist Challenge.

Picture a devoutly religious man.  He follows another man who is considered to be a prophet.  This prophet talks to a particular god on a daily basis and (more importantly) this god talks back, relaying instructions for the other man (and his fellow believers) to follow.

On a typical morning, the devoutly religious man gets out of bed and receives an order from the prophet.  According to the prophet, the god has ordered the devoutly religious man to go kill another man who may or may not be equally religious but who definitely does not believe in the same god or follow the same prophet.  Aside from this difference of opinion, the devoutly religious man has no quarrel with the man he is ordered to kill.  But all that aside, the devoutly religious man goes and kills the man he is ordered to kill by his god who ordered him to do so by way of the prophet.  The other man was one of “them,” and had to die.

Why didn’t the god not just tell the first man to kill the other man himself? Why not just speak to him directly.  Why was a prophet necessary? Better yet, the god is a god. Why not just kill the other man himself and cut out the middle men altogether? But I digress.

The devoutly religious man has killed another man of more or less the same level of devotion to a different god for no other reason than he was just following orders, and the other guy was one of “them.”.

So now that we’ve seen the wind-up, here’s the pitch:

Is the devoutly religious man:

A.) A jihadi terrorist on September 11, 2001?

B.) A member of the Waffen SS in 1944?

C.) A Christian Crusader outside of a Turkish village in 1100?

D.) An Israelite outside of Jericho as described in the Book of Joshua?

E.) A member of the Manson Family in 1969?

Let’s be honest: without a tremendous amount of mental gymnastics, special pleading, “yeah, but”s and other excuse making, you can’t tell the difference.  Neither can I, which is why I am an atheist.

Now, some of you will try to say that I am oversimplifying and taking things out of context.

From where I am sitting, I have provided all the context necessary to make the point. 

But, I don’t claim to have a monopoly on truth, so if you can provide the right "context," be my guest.