Four things a theist must show...not an easy task

It's always fun to get into it with theists making absolutely unsubstantiated claims about their chosen deity, how the world works, history, etc etc. Most of the time, I choose to go the "for the sake of argument" route and get on the theists level, so to speak. This backfires, sometimes, when they take that to mean that I actually DO believe in Yahweh, but that I'm actually just mad at him I'm sure you have heard that before if you've spent any time in conversation with a theist. 

So, to clear things up, I want to outline the four hurdles that a theist actually faces when they try and convince me of something. I'm not going to get into each of the arguments for or against... I just want to briefly explain each step along the way. 

First, starting at the beginning, you have to show that the universe was created by, well, a creator of some sort. There are plenty of faulty logical arguments that attempt to prove this, which I won't get into here, but ultimately, no one can really know about what happened "before" the Big Bang; that concept may be nonsensical on its face, after all...what time occured before time? 

The conversation should probably stop right there, it might seem. But where's the fun in that? So, for the sake of argument, we can move on to the second hurdle. 

Second, theists have to show that the creator from step one is some sort of personal agent type of deity. Sure, it created the universe, but are their any qualities of this creator that would prompt it to create this planet, our species, take direct action for or against our species, care enough about us to care about how we treat each other, etc?  This is also difficult to achieve, and we also see some very faulty logical proofs attempted along with some great leaps in reasoning that can be truly mind boggling. 

Third, having cleared the first two hurdles, theists must now assert that the universal creator who personally intervenes in our lives is the particular personal creator that THEY happen to believe in. Is it Yahweh? Allah? Thor? Ahura Mazda? Izanagi and Izanami? This one can sometimes be problematic because any of the arguments for one particular deity can very often be used verbatim for any of the others. Oh YOUR god makes Claim X? Well, so do these other dozen gods. And so on. 

Discussions of the first three hurdles are often complete shit shows because there is simply nothing to really discuss. It's all assertions, wishful thinking, thought experiments, etc...there is no real substance to discuss. You can assert and dismiss just about anything the other side says because there is so little to work with. It's feelings and "you just know" and "doesn't it just make sense?".  

It can get very frustrating very quickly, and I admit that it's not a lot of fun. There's nothing to really sink your teeth into with these discussions. That's why I, like many of you, like to hang out around the fourth hurdle.

Fourth, theists need to argue that their chosen deity, which we will grant for the sake of argument, is actually a being worth following. This is a fun discussion. This is, as much as it's possible, the meat and potatoes of theological debate simply because we actually do have something to go on. We have the holy books themselves, which describe, often in intricate detail, the actions, thought, and motivations of the deities in question. 

What's so fun about it is that theists are forced to think about the alleged actions of their deity. Some will try to resist and twist their way out of it, but many will happily argue in favor of slavery, genocide, etc because they can't get past "if god did it, it's good". It's amazing!

Additionally, it's at this step where interesting discussions can be had regarding morality and free will. These are important discussions to have, regardless of one's religious views. Philosophy is a worthy endeavor in general and it's always good to get a variety of views.  

And just like theists must build their positions through these four steps, step four is where, I think, deconversion begins. Once you start question the value of a specific theisitic worldview, it's possible to work backwards through the hurdles...ok, so it's not Yahweh, but maybe it's another personal god...ok, so maybe not a personal god, but at least a creator...ok, so we can't prove a creator, so let's just do what we can to enjoy life and not worry so much about it. 

As I said, this is just kind of an overview. I'm sure I missed something important. Let me know what you think!