Now, here is a challenge for atheists.

This is an hypothetical situation,
A man, Let's say Mr A, was able to somehow lay hold on a nuke that could destroy all humanity at a bottom, and he is determined to detonate it. How would you persuade such a person not to do it. Mind you he believes
1. There is no God neither any punishment for sins and misdeeds.
2 He believes the universe or multiverse is nothing else but ever changing forms of energies/energy.
3. Morality or what's not are all evolutionary construct to make so called higher organism to think life is special in other for organism like humans to continue to propagate.
4. Since love, hatred, good evil are all product of subatomic interactions, there is nothing really evil or good other than that that is determine by fundamental forces of nature.

How would you convince such a man not to push that button?

I am not an atheist but let me find an answer to your question. First of all, this is a global scenario and it's only by the efforts of scientists that such a nuke can be neutralised. Therefore the scientists will work on something that will make it impossible to detonate. We have missiles and anti-missiles. It's only in Africa that people will be begging such person in fear not to do it. In advanced nations, they will work out things that will make it impossible to work. Was it Iraq that year that claimed to be having weapon of mass destruction, I don't think anybody begged them, rather, advanced nations worked on their counter-weapons and got themselves ready.

So if I were to be an atheist and someone somewhere is claiming to have something that can destroy the whole world, I will not persuade the person not to do it, rather I will laugh over it and tell him to "do it and let's see'.

That's how some religious gods have been threatening us that they are capable of ending the world for more than 2000 years now and till date, they don't know how to go about it. Mtchew.

OtemAtum:
I am not an atheist but let me find an answer to your question. First of all, this is a global scenario and it's only by the efforts of scientists that such a nuke can be neutralised. Therefore the scientists will work on something that will make it impossible to detonate. We have missiles and anti-missiles. It's only in Africa that people will be begging such person in fear not to do it. In advanced nations, they will work out things that will make it impossible to work. Was it Iraq that year that claimed to be having weapon of mass destruction, I don't think anybody begged them, rather, advanced nations worked on their counter-weapons and got themselves ready.

So if I were to be an atheist and someone somewhere is claiming to have something that can destroy the whole world, I will not persuade the person not to do it, rather I will laugh over it and tell him to "do it and let's see'.

That's how some religious gods have been threatening us that they are capable of ending the world for more than 2000 years now and till date, they don't know how to go about it. Mtchew.

This comment goes way off the provisions of the fundamental assumptions the post is built on.

I place humanity above Gods so I would persuade him not to do it. But I actually believe if he does it's to Gods detriment. Cos they survive on our worship note I am not an atheist but a misotheist.

johnydon22:
This comment goes way off the provisions of the fundamental assumptions the post is built on.

can you elucidate please?

Steep:
Now, here is a challenge for atheists.

This is an hypothetical situation,
A man, Let's say Mr A, was able to somehow lay hold on a nuke that could destroy all humanity at a bottom, and he is determined to detonate it. How would you persuade such a person not to do it. Mind you he believes
1. There is no God neither any punishment for sins and misdeeds.
2 He believes the universe or multiverse is nothing else but ever changing forms of energies/energy.
3. Morality or what's not are all evolutionary construct to make so called higher organism to think life is special in other for organism like humans to continue to propagate.
4. Since love, hatred, good evil are all product of subatomic interactions, there is nothing really evil or good other than that that is determine by fundamental forces of nature.

How would you convince such a man not to push that button?

There are fundamental flaws in your assumptions about morality as held by atheists. You have to first understand that the idea of morality as a God-centered enterprise is majorly an Abrahamic idea, at least in the modern sense. Most cultures developed moral values and ideas without basing these ideas of the authority of God punishing or rewarding certain actions.

So, someone not believing in God is not mutually exclusive with them having firm moral beliefs.

I do not know what you mean by good and evil being products of subatomic interactions, I am hoping you will explain that further

But here is how I will try convincing such a person: I will appeal to their rationality, practicality and curiosity.

1. Rationality: Detonating the nuke serves no purpose to him, so what would it matter to him to detonate it?
2. Practical: He has family members, friends whom I assume he deeply cares about. Why would he want to remove the choice to either live or die from those whom he confesses to love?
3. Curiosity: Assuming that such a person is a nihilist as your post seems to imply, even a nihilist can be curious. We have both seen the scientific wonders, architectural and technological marvels human has been capable of in the last century, wouldn't you like to find out where it is all going? What comes next? Perhaps, you could hold off nuking everyone just yet.

So now OP, assuming this person believes in a God but is determined to nuke everyone, how would you convince them otherwise?

OtemAtum:
can you elucidate please?

Here are his basic assumptions

"This is an hypothetical situation,
A man, Let's say Mr A, was able to somehow lay hold on a nuke that could destroy all humanity at a bottom, and he is determined to detonate"

This whole post was built fundamentally on the above assumption, so its answer does not lie in trying to rationalize how else the problem can be solved. The assumptions he presented only gave one option, convince the nuke man otherwise, no other.

You must answer within that given premise, anything else simply is missing the point. It is a hypothetical assumption that doesn't require you to rationalize more than the information and assumptive parameters it presents.

OtemAtum:
I am not an atheist but let me find an answer to your question. First of all, this is a global scenario and it's only by the efforts of scientists that such a nuke can be neutralised. Therefore the scientists will work on something that will make it impossible to detonate. We have missiles and anti-missiles. It's only in Africa that people will be begging such person in fear not to do it. In advanced nations, they will work out things that will make it impossible to work. Was it Iraq that year that claimed to be having weapon of mass destruction, I don't think anybody begged them, rather, advanced nations worked on their counter-weapons and got themselves ready.

So if I were to be an atheist and someone somewhere is claiming to have something that can destroy the whole world, I will not persuade the person not to do it, rather I will laugh over it and tell him to "do it and let's see'.

That's how some religious gods have been threatening us that they are capable of ending the world for more than 2000 years now and till date, they don't know how to go about it. Mtchew.

lol you ended up not saying anything.

SimplePlan34:
I place humanity above Gods so I would persuade him not to do it. But I actually believe if he does it's to Gods detriment. Cos they survive on our worship note I am not an atheist but a misotheist.

you mean humanity the bunch of organic matter that is a product of cosmic accident?
You are not making sense because this man does not believe in God or God's.

Steep:
Now, here is a challenge for atheists.

This is an hypothetical situation,
A man, Let's say Mr A, was able to somehow lay hold on a nuke that could destroy all humanity at a bottom, and he is determined to detonate it. How would you persuade such a person not to do it. Mind you he believes
1. There is no God neither any punishment for sins and misdeeds.
2 He believes the universe or multiverse is nothing else but ever changing forms of energies/energy.
3. Morality or what's not are all evolutionary construct to make so called higher organism to think life is special in other for organism like humans to continue to propagate.
4. Since love, hatred, good evil are all product of subatomic interactions, there is nothing really evil or good other than that that is determine by fundamental forces of nature.

How would you convince such a man not to push that button?

This is really the same as when the person is religious, you use emotional appeal and then you hope. in fact it will be more difficult to persuade him not to if he is a religious person and he believes his god wants him to do it.

johnydon22:


There are fundamental flaws in your assumptions about morality as held by atheists. You have to first understand that the idea of morality as a God-centered enterprise is majorly an Abrahamic idea, at least in the modern sense. Most cultures developed moral values and ideas without basing these ideas of the authority of God punishing or rewarding certain actions.

@bolded it is not about atheistic morality infact atheism has nothing to do with morality "it is just unbelief in God",
What do you mean by
" You have to first understand that the idea of morality as a God-centered enterprise is majorly an Abrahamic idea, at least in the modern sense. "

Do you mean that there was a time when God was not the center of Abrahamic religion?
Secondly, except you want to lie to yourself, most world culture were heavily rooted in theism, morality was derived from the gods or goddess, and there were rewards or punishments for actions, have you heard of karma and reincarnation it was almost a universal belief, most pagan believe in souls being reborn to pay for their actions.

So, someone not believing in God is not mutually exclusive with them having firm moral beliefs.

without God everybody will simply have a moral belief that suite them and there is nothing you can do about that.

I do not know what you mean by good and evil being products of subatomic interactions, I am hoping you will explain that further

matter is made up of atoms which in turn are made up to subatomic particles, everything that takes place in the macro world are simply subatomic particles interacting with each other.

But here is how I will try convincing such a person: I will appeal to their rationality, practicality and curiosity.

1. Rationality: Detonating the nuke serves no purpose to him, so what would it matter to him to detonate it?

universally or multiversally nothing has any purpose.
Next

2. Practical: He has family members, friends whom I assume he deeply cares about. Why would he want to remove the choice to either live or die from those whom he confesses to love?

this is not appeal to rationality but appeal to sentiment.
Scienfically love, hatred are only evolutionary tools and at the end of the day love, hatred and comologically does not really matter, asteroid swopping along to destroy your world does not care about your love or hate.

3. Curiosity: Assuming that such a person is a nihilist as your post seems to imply, even a nihilist can be curious. We have both seen the scientific wonders, architectural and technological marvels human has been capable of in the last century, wouldn't you like to find out where it is all going? What comes next? Perhaps, you could hold off nuking everyone just yet.

Human advancement and marvels still doesn't matter, since all humans, animals and everything are nothing but atomic and subatomic interactions. Since human technology and advancement really has no purpose other than being an evolutionary tool to continue human propagation.
The Truth is destroying humanity is nether good or evil, atheism/humanism try to create their own morality, why? Why do have the urge to have morality? It is all about human propagation, but again what is the use of human propagation
I expected something logically but I am highly disappointed in the replies I got.
Honestly, it weak and pathetic what you have come up.

So now OP, assuming this person believes in a God but is determined to nuke everyone, how would you convince them otherwise?

well if he believes in God he could be persuaded based on his belief in God. And Again it depends on the concept of God he believes, a Christian for example would never do such because the Christian God is love itself

Take God away from a man then you have just made him a beast.

adoyi8:


This is really the same as when the person is religious, you use emotional appeal and then you hope. in fact it will be more difficult to persuade him not to if he is a religious person and he believes his god wants him to do it.

I thought atheism was about proof not emotional appeal that religion uses.

It depends on the concept of God the theist believes in, in Christianity God is love who send Jesus to save the world from their sins.

Steep:
I thought atheism was about proof not emotional appeal that religion uses.

It depends on the concept of God the theist believes in, in Christianity God is love who send Jesus to save the world from their sins.

The biggest tool humans use to convince others is emotional appeal be they atheists or theists. Even children are experts at using emotional appeal on their parents or other adults.


A Christian can pick any garbage from the bible and act on it. What if the person is convinced that god wants him be like samson? To die by committing suicide as long as it will also destroy the lives of infidels.

adoyi8:


The biggest tool humans use to convince others is emotional appeal be they atheists or theists. Even children are experts at using emotional appeal on their parents or other adults.


A Christian can pick any garbage from the bible and act on it. What if the person is convinced that god wants him be like samson? To die by committing suicide as long as it will also destroy the lives of infidels.

emotional appeal is the biggest tool to convince others, would you be convinced to practice religion based on emotional appeal? You see how insane your argument is.

Samson only avenged what the enemies did to him. It is called justice, Christianity has a different purpose in itself which is to save people's life.

You have not said anything, the truth atheism has no answer.
Without God humanity is nothing but an animal, a beast.

johnydon22:
Here are his basic assumptions

"This is an hypothetical situation,
A man, Let's say Mr A, was able to somehow lay hold on a nuke that could destroy all humanity at a bottom, and he is determined to detonate"

This whole post was built fundamentally on the above assumption, so it's answer does not lie in trying to rationalize how else the problem can be solved. The assumptions he presented only gave one option, convince the nuke man otherwise, no other.

You must answer within that given premise, anything else simply is missing the point. It is a hypothetical assumption that doesn't require you to rationalize more than the information and assumptive parameters it presents.

Okay, since it's not based on reality but assumption, I should also give an assumed solution. I get your point.

Atheism has no answer.
Jesus is Lord and savior. Amen and Amen

I will put a gun to his head and tell him to back off. A bullet moves faster than a human, that's how I would appeal to him.

Steep:
Atheism has no answer.
Jesus is Lord and savior. Amen and Amen

Yes it doesn't have answers because we don't seek answers from atheism so your summation is unnecessary and somewhat incoherent.

Steep:
Atheism has no answer.
Jesus is Lord and savior. Amen and Amen

To what end?

LordReed:


Yes it doesn't have answers because we don't seek answers from atheism so your summation is unnecessary and somewhat incoherent.

Sometime some questions and some post you suppose ignore. It is highly improbable that such an event will ever happen. In fact you are more likely to have a party with Kim Kardashian and Demi rose and also win 100 million dollars lottery in the same day than to have the power of all the world nuke in your hands.
He says that the person will have no morals because he doesn't believe in God but Hitler was a christain,all our politicians are either christain, Muslim or traditional worshippers but they are looking us dry. This implies that religion has little to no effect on the morality of an individual.
If even someone was smart, charming, cunning and ruthless to have the power to blow us to bits using the world's nukes, he or she or non binary will probably be self serving and wants to survive at any cost. If he/she/non binary was brilliant enough to build even one nuke unnoticed,he/she/non binary will know the consequences on detonating such a bomb and will probably not do it.
Even if he/she/non binary detonates it then we die which is not a big deal given that humans right now are very very insignificant compared to the vastness of the universe. Thank you.

Steep:
emotional appeal is the biggest tool to convince others, would you be convinced to practice religion based on emotional appeal? You see how insane your argument is.

Samson only avenged what the enemies did to him. It is called justice, Christianity has a different purpose in itself which is to save people's life.

You have not said anything, the truth atheism has no answer.
Without God humanity is nothing but an animal, a beast.

You can sugarcoat Christianity as a moral religion as much as you want but remember one of the most influential role models in the bible, David killed 300 philistines and removed their foreskins just because he wanted to marry abigail. Elijah slaughtered 400 prophets of baal in a single day, I can never imagine doing that as an atheist. So just know that the immoral acts that humans can commit in the name of no religion can also be committed in the name of religion and it is more difficult to dissuade someone who believes that he is carrying an act on command of god.

You cant use emotional appeal to make me believe in God because its something impossible for me to do but people have used emotional appeal to make me go to church or close my eyes to pray and it works frequently.

ifyken:

Sometime some questions and some post you suppose ignore. It is highly improbable that such an event will ever happen. In fact you are more likely to have a party with Kim Kardashian and Demi rose and also win 100 million dollars lottery in the same day than to have the power of all the world nuke in your hands.
He says that the person will have no morals because he doesn't believe in God but Hitler was a christain,all our politicians are either christain, Muslim or traditional worshippers but they are looking us dry. This implies that religion has little to no effect on the morality of an individual.
If even someone was smart, charming, cunning and ruthless to have the power to blow us to bits using the world's nukes, he or she or non binary will probably be self serving and wants to survive at any cost. If he/she/non binary was brilliant enough to build even one nuke unnoticed,he/she/non binary will know the consequences on detonating such a bomb and will probably not do it.
Even if he/she/non binary detonates it then we die which is not a big deal given that humans right now are very very insignificant compared to the vastness of the universe. Thank you.

Yeah but some thought experiments are interesting to think about even though they are very improbable.

Insanity is when you can't provide evidence for the existence of something, yet you want people to believe it exist.

Try to talk him out of it (obviously because who wants to get nuked by some lunatic?)
Tell him that whatever reason he might be having to want to anhiliate humans could be sorted out without loss of innocent lives. Tell him to think about the lives of poor kids he's going to end, Remind him that he too was once a kid and never wanted hurt to come his way. Tell him life is all about enjoying what you have and cherishing those moments with the ones you love.
If he doesn't see reasons in this, he's just another mad man and nothing will change his mind if his mind is made up.
And Op, desist from asking silly questions like this making people think Atheists are robots without human feelings or reason to show compassion. I'm sure in most cases where one had to be talked out of doing something terrible, nobody convinced them with "God". The police don't do that also.

Steep:
emotional appeal is the biggest tool to convince others, would you be convinced to practice religion based on emotional appeal? You see how insane your argument is.

Samson only avenged what the enemies did to him. It is called justice, Christianity has a different purpose in itself which is to save people's life.

You have not said anything, the truth atheism has no answer.
Without God humanity is nothing but an animal, a beast.

This same god abi another one?

1st Samuel 15:3 : "Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys"

Even you will agree that this will be considered a 'beast like' attitude if it were to be carried out by humans in this modern age. And I'm sure you'll agree that the above verse is "evil". So that talk that morality comes from your god is laughable.

kingxsamz:


This same god abi another one?


Even you will agree that this will be considered a 'beast like' attitude if it were to be carried out by humans in this modern age. And I'm sure you'll agree that the above verse is "evil". So that talk that morality comes from your god is laughable.

Do you know the relationship between the Amalekites and Israel?

The Amalekites was at generational war with Israel, only a complete wipe off, can end such war. Yes one might feel sorry for the children and babies but it would save them from continuing the endless cycle of war with Israel.

adoyi8:

You can sugarcoat Christianity as a moral religion as much as you want but remember one of the most influential role models in the bible, David killed 300 philistines and removed their foreskins just because he wanted to marry abigail. Elijah slaughtered 400 prophets of baal in a single day, I can never imagine doing that as an atheist. So just know that the immoral acts that humans can commit in the name of no religion can also be committed in the name of religion and it is more difficult to dissuade someone who believes that he is carrying an act on command of god.

Do you know how many prophets of God jezabel and her prophets of baal has killed? Secondly those prophets of baal know that Israel serve Yahweh only and they knew the repercussions of trying to turn Israel away from the Lord their God.

It was saul that commanded David to kill the philistines in order to avenge for what they had done to him.
By the way these were philistine soldiers who probably had dealt with Saul.

1 Samuel 18:25 And Saul said, Thus shall ye say to David, The king desireth not any dowry, but an hundred foreskins of the Philistines, to be avenged of the king's enemies. But Saul thought to make David fall by the hand of the Philistines.

Saul wanted actually to eliminate David, by sending him into the enemies camp.

At that time Israel and philistines were at war.

You cant use emotional appeal to make me believe in God because its something impossible for me to do but people have used emotional appeal to make me go to church or close my eyes to pray and it works frequently.

Just as you cannot be persuaded by emotional appeal to believe in God so that man cannot be persuaded by emotional appeal to believe in something you believe in.

Why are atheist afraid of their own shadow, they are afraid of a man who believes totally in atheistical logical reasoning.
Man without God is nothing but a beast.

Steep:
Do you know the relationship between the Amalekites and Israel?

The Amalekites was at generational war with Israel, only a complete wipe off, can end such war. Yes one might feel sorry for the children and babies but it would save them from continuing the endless cycle of war with Israel.

Lol, funny answer. So quick question.
If the Hausas in the north start killing Igbos over there, would you suggest that the Igbos wipe out the entire Hausa tribe so that their children don't take up from their parents? Please answer according to how you just defended the genocide in the Verse I provided. Thank you.

Steep:
Do you know the relationship between the Amalekites and Israel?

The Amalekites was at generational war with Israel, only a complete wipe off, can end such war. Yes one might feel sorry for the children and babies but it would save them from continuing the endless cycle of war with Israel.

Oh yeah? I guess the Nazis were the descendants of the Amalekites who survived the divine genocide. Thus saith the Lord to Hitler, “gas some Jews and drink some juice”.

Steep:
Do you know how many prophets of God jezabel and her prophets of baal has killed? Secondly those prophets of baal know that Israel serve Yahweh only and they knew the repercussions of trying to turn Israel away from the Lord their God.

It was saul that commanded David to kill the philistines in order to avenge for what they had done to him.
By the way these were philistine soldiers who probably had dealt with Saul.

1 Samuel 18:25 And Saul said, Thus shall ye say to David, The king desireth not any dowry, but an hundred foreskins of the Philistines, to be avenged of the king's enemies. But Saul thought to make David fall by the hand of the Philistines.

Saul wanted actually to eliminate David, by sending him into the enemies camp.

At that time Israel and philistines were at war.


Just as you cannot be persuaded by emotional appeal to believe in God so that man cannot be persuaded by emotional appeal to believe in something you believe in.

You are giving excuses of why your moral role models took out hideous mass murder that makes atheists like myself shudder. All criminals also have good excuses for their crimes. Do you think Adolf Hitler dont have excuses for executing 6 million jews?

You cannot use emotional appeal to persuade someone to believe something but you can persuade him to take a decision/action using emotional appeal. It is a basic tool of persuasion that even children are experts at using so I dont know why it's hard for you to comprehend.

Steep:
Do you know how many prophets of God jezabel and her prophets of baal has killed? Secondly those prophets of baal know that Israel serve Yahweh only and they knew the repercussions of trying to turn Israel away from the Lord their God.

It was saul that commanded David to kill the philistines in order to avenge for what they had done to him.
By the way these were philistine soldiers who probably had dealt with Saul.

1 Samuel 18:25 And Saul said, Thus shall ye say to David, The king desireth not any dowry, but an hundred foreskins of the Philistines, to be avenged of the king's enemies. But Saul thought to make David fall by the hand of the Philistines.

Saul wanted actually to eliminate David, by sending him into the enemies camp.

At that time Israel and philistines were at war.


Just as you cannot be persuaded by emotional appeal to believe in God so that man cannot be persuaded by emotional appeal to believe in something you believe in.

David’s shenanigans. One of the greatest works of propaganda in the sordid history of mankind. A piece of shit who was the “apple of god’s eye”. The perfect excuse for morally flexible religionists to goose step behind any moral deviant. After all, if God could love David, he can love Trump or any other deplorable creature they are marching behind.