Watch for Updates

Originally Posted May 8, 2021
by Robert Baty

A.J. Patterson (aka Atheist Jr.) FaceBook Address:

https://www.facebook.com/aj.patterson.37/

A.J. Patterson (aka Atheist Jr.) YouTube Address:

https://www.youtube.com/c/AtheistJr/videos

Link to FaceBook Thread Where Debate Took Place:

https://www.facebook.com/groups/kenthovindsworstnightmare/permalink/1851022748400179


The Argument

MAJOR PREMISE:

IF (a) man was able to originate the idea/concept of God through the power of imagination, THEN (b) man did originate the idea/concept of God through the power of imagination.

MINOR PREMISE:

(a) Man was able to originate the idea/concept of God through the power of imagination.

CONCLUSION:

(b) Man did originate the idea/concept of God through the power of imagination.

Proposition #1

IF (a) man was able to originate the idea/concept of God through the power of imagination, THEN (b) man did originate the idea/concept of God through the power of imagination.

A.J. Patterson (aka Atheist Jr.): Affirm
Robert Baty: Deny

A.J. Patterson (aka Atheist Jr.) First Affirmative

May 7, 2021  9:05 & 9:07 AM MT
The premises can absolutely be established to be true because I can imagine a God right now, and I could write a book about him.
So that means that it could have happened in the past too.
I know the premises are true because the conclusion follows from the premises making it a sound argument.
That’s how I establish that they are true, the logic proves it.

Robert Baty First Negative

May 8, 2021  7:43 AM MT
Proposition #1:
IF (a) man was able to originate the idea/concept of God through the power of imagination, THEN (b) man did originate the idea/concept of God through the power of imagination.
A.J. Patterson (aka Atheist Jr.): Affirm
Robert Baty: Deny
A.J. Patterson, in defense of his affirmation of the above proposition, claims:
“I know the premises are true because the conclusion follows from the premises making it a sound argument.  That’s how I establish that they are true, the logic proves it.” – (A.J. Patterson)
If the premises of a valid argument are true, the conclusion will follow as true therefrom, making it a sound argument.
A.J. and I have agreed that the related argument from which Proposition #1 comes is valid. What A.J. has taken up is the cause of proving the truth of the premises, and we have taken up the major premise shown as our Proposition #1.
In essence, A.J. has claimed that he knows the premises are true because the conclusion follows from the premises (the argument is valid).
Really, A.J.?
Really?
Nope!
What you have said, in other words, is that if an argument is valid (properly, logically constructed), then the premises are true.
Nope, nope, nope!
If you want to challenge my criticism regarding that, A.J., we can match authorities and see who comes out on top. You are simply wrong on that and your claim is false.
In fact, a valid argument can have a true conclusion and one or more false premises; or, as in this case, premises that you can NOT show as true, though you can believe them to be true.
A.J., your second attempt to prove up your proposition is:
“The premises can absolutely be established to be true because I can imagine a God right now, and I could write a book about him.  So that means that it could have happened in the past too.” – (A.J. Patterson)
Nope!
We are talking about the “origin” of the notion of God, A.J., not your ability to take what you already are aware of and imagine related images.
You didn’t, can’t originate the idea/concept/notion of God, and you don’t know anyone that did/can do it.
I like your limited claim that you only believe that some ancient creature “could have” originated the idea/concept/notion of God because you, to whom such concepts/notions/ideas were revealed can use your imagination to manipulate your revelation.
Your burden in this “debate” is to establish, beyond your simple belief, that not only did some ancient creature (man) have the ability to “originate” the concept but that it did do it because there is no other option as to how the concept of God might have originated.
You have utterly failed, A.J., in your task.
Feel free to submit your second affirmation as you have the time and interest.

A.J. Patterson did not continue and submit a second affirmative, but he did have somewhat to say, including that he was not acting in good faith and was resigning from the debate.  The following comments were posted by him to the debate thread and elsewhere in the “Kent Hovind’s Worst Nightmare” FaceBook group.  I responded to some of his comments as shown below.

A.J. Patterson’s (aka Atheist Jr.) – May 8, 2021  11:21 AM MT

I meant to say that the argument is sound. That’s my mistake. A sound argument cannot have false premises. But the premises aren’t false, boomer.

Robert Baty – May 8, 2021  11:23 AM MT

Do you intend that to be your second affirmative.
If so, please be explicit.
If not, please post your second affirmative and clearly label it as such; whenever you get the time and interest.

A.J. Patterson’s (aka Atheist Jr.) – May 8, 2021  11:23 AM MT

Wait a minute, are you trying to say that I have to prove that ancient men did not imagine a God? You’re seriously asking me to prove a negative? I’d like you to tell me how I can prove that ancient people did not imagine a god, do I have a time machine can I read their minds?

Robert Baty – May 8, 2021  11:24 AM MT

You are welcome to add that as part of your second affirmative if you wish.
Just try to make it clear what your second affirmative is and I will try to deal with it as soon as possible after you get it posted.

A.J. Patterson’s (aka Atheist Jr.) – May 8, 2021  11:27 AM MT

I like how you claim that me editing my post is tampering with evidence, when what I was editing was just me cleaning up the syntax of my sentence.
Of course, I’m sure you’ll be able to post your screenshot of the original sentence because you constantly record the history of my post, as well as my Twitter and youtube. I know you think that I really care about your stupid “debate”, misinterpreting my tweets and videos to think they’re about you when they don’t mention you at all.
My patience is really running thin, I would be happy to continue talking about this subject with you, but if you keep insulting me, I’m done.

A.J. Patterson’s (aka Atheist Jr.) – May 8, 2021 11:29 AM MT

Do you have to make a gigantic wall of text with a bunch of wall of text comments over and over again?  Can you not simplify what you’re saying a little bit, because nobody knows what the hell you’re talking about.

A.J. Patterson’s (aka Atheist Jr.) – May 8, 2021  11:32 AM MT

I can’t originate the concept of a God because it existed before I was born, as well as anyone I know that’s Alive today?

A.J. Patterson’s (aka Atheist Jr.) – May 8, 2021  11:33 AM MT

I’d like to get this bullshit over with. (A.J. later deleted this post.)

From Robert Baty May 8, 2021  11:34 AM MT

“I might suggest you went to flat out lying in that post, A.J., but it is clear enough that you have withdrawn from this important public “debate” without even mustering a good faith effort to establish your affirmative position.
I appreciate your addition to the historical record.
Thanks for the effort.
You did as well as anyone could, and failed to anything but demonstrate my claims for my Exercise and Argument are unrebutted.
This ‘debate’ may now be considered as concluded and the thread will be closed to comments.”

Update May 9, 2021

A.J. Patterson, earlier today, posted on his YouTube channel a discussion he had with “Darth Dawkins” (aka Michael Milne).  In that discussion, A.J., implicitly, admitted he had nothing but his personal beliefs to try and show the truth of the premises in the Argument we were discussing as noted above.

https://youtu.be/yxcdZ3pPbsQ?t=1800



References

Atheism 101 Critical Thinking Exercise by Robert Baty

http://kehvrlb.com/atheism-101-critical-thinking-exercise

Dziubla v. Baty Debate

http://kehvrlb.com/dziubla-v-baty-atheism-imagination

Campbell v. Owen Debate of 1829 – Pages 122-127

https://webfiles.acu.edu/departments/Library/HR/restmov_nov11/www.mun.ca/rels/restmov/texts/acampbell/cod/COD18.HTM

(Begin excerpt.)

“A PROBLEM
“To the Editors of the New Harmony Gazette.
      “You think that reason cannot originate the idea of an Eternal First Cause, or that no man could acquire such an idea by the employment of his senses and reason–and you think correctly. You think also that the Bible is not a supernatural revelation–not a revelation from a Deity in any sense. These things premised, gentlemen, I present my problem in the form of a query again.
      “The Christian idea of an Eternal First Cause uncaused, or of a God, is now in the world, and has been for ages immemorial. You say it could not enter into the world by reason, and it did not enter by revelation. Now, as you are philosophers and historians, and have all the means of knowing, How did it come into the world?”
      [Mr. Owen asserts, after hearing this problem read, “By imagination.“]
      I am just now told by Mr. Owen, that the idea of a God obtained this universality through imagination. Now, let us try the merits of this solution. Imagination, all writers agree, has not the power of creating any new idea. It has the power of analyzing, combining, compounding, and new-modifying all the different ideas presented to it; but imagination has no creative power.
      No system of philosophy that is now taught in any school, will warrant us to attribute to imagination any such power. Neither Locke [123] nor Hume will allow it: and these are the most respectable in the Christian and infidel schools. We shall hear what each of them has to say upon the power of imagination:–

(End excerpt.)

Warren v. Flew Debate of 1976 – Session #1

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hbWVpky7t9Y

(Begin excerpt.)

Some people have been surprised and even a little shocked to find me proposing a straight atheist resolution – “I know there is no God” – rather than something more cautiously agnostic – “I do not think the thing is proved, or even can be proved, either way; and anyway do not expect me to stand up and be counted”.
So, let us begin the business of trying to explain and to justify the BOLD ATHEIST rather than the more respectably cautious “agnostic”.

(End excerpt.)


Select Screenshots From FaceBook

From the Debate Thread At:

https://www.facebook.com/groups/kenthovindsworstnightmare/permalink/1851022748400179

There were other posts in other threads.  Screenshots of some of them may be added later, but they don’t reflect any attempt by A.J. Patterson to actually establish the truth of Proposition #1.

Update May 14, 2021

Followup!

On May 13, 2021 someone using the Twitter account of Peter DeTukker contacted me on behalf of A.J. Patterson (aka Atheist Jr.) asking that I remove a tweet.  Despite my historical reluctance to tamper with the historical record, I obliged.  Then he asked for more.  While continuing my historical reluctance to such tampering, I obliged.  Then, right after my last tweet on the subject, someone using the FaceBook account of A.J. Patterson contacted me via FaceBook Messenger asking for even more and threatening me.  For now, I assume the Twitter attack failed and that is why they contacted me directly.  What next from this sore loser!  I don’t know!  This is being posted for the record and for my own protection.
The Twitter Exchange via Private Messaging

FaceBook Messenger (I have not responded)

FaceBook Group Record (It is NOT, NOT, NOT private)!

Update May 15, 2021

What some others have had to say!

https://www.facebook.com/groups/kenthovindsworstnightmare/permalink/1856627651173022

A.J. Patterson/Atheist Jr. notes this on Twitter!

https://twitter.com/realDavid_/status/1393242702951628807

Further evidence that, just as I claimed, my positions regarding my debate with A.J. are not really controversial; atheists believe it and that’s as close as they get to their fundamental claim.  The claims I make for my Argument & Exercise remain unrebutted.

Update May 17, 2021

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gcfsBEQEX1s

Update May 18, 2021

https://twitter.com/AtheistJr/status/1394644713320366085

Update May 19, 2021

The Aron Ra Interview

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gcfsBEQEX1s

Update May 29, 2021

I was looking forward with A.J.’s interview with Gutsick Gibbon, with whom I interviewed a few months ago along with Aron Ra and Peter DeTukker.

For some reason, A.J. appears to have removed his interview and further went underground with regard to his Twitter account.

Update May 31, 2021

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CnkHUUdtKi4

Update June 1, 2021

Looks like A.J. just rescheduled his interview with Gutsick Gibbon!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pxTBEcEdtzQ

Update June 26, 2021

A.J. seems to be a bit of hypocrite!

Update July 23, 2021

Peter DeTukker continues his doxxing complaint!

https://www.facebook.com/groups/kenthovindsworstnightmare/posts/1888714141297706/

Peter DeTukker continues his threatening on behalf of A.J.!
#1 is my graphic of A.J.’s video.  #2 is what shows on YouTube.

Update July 24, 2021

https://www.facebook.com/groups/khwnprivate/posts/354936272990564/

Update August 3, 2021

Link to A.J.’s Tweet

https://twitter.com/AtheistJr/status/1422491023805190147

Link to Hemant Mehta post featuring Kent Hovind story and me!

https://friendlyatheist.patheos.com/2021/08/03/creationist-kent-hovind-bodyslammed-me-says-ex-girlfriend-in-court-filing/

Update August 10, 2021

Link to related article on this site which was published on August 10, 2021:

http://kehvrlb.com/a-j-v-r-l-latest-chapter

Update August 28, 2021

https://twitter.com/AtheistJr/status/1431743524374990850

 

 

.



 


Comments

Patterson (Atheist Jr.) v. Baty – Atheism Debate — No Comments

Leave a Reply