Babylon Sister

Notice the smilie....

Calzaer

Most theists smile at me when they're feeding me a line of bull...

Bumble Bee Tuna

It's hard for me to think he is serious when he ends with

-B

ElectEngr

Originally posted by flurpy2

22 The witness of men of science. http://www.icr.org/idx-txt.htm

ME==>The link dosn't work. Also it's ICR so I take it with several kilo's of NaCl

23 The proof from great art. We're all aware of the great religious motifs in paintings, sculptures, and musical masterpieces. Has even one great work been inspired by the denial of God?

ME==>How about Mozart's The Marriage of Figaro

24 The witness of farmers. Atheism is the child of city-dwellers who are enclosed within walls and perceive the universe through grimy windowpanes. They do not see the universe as it really is. Farmers who live in close communion with nature know it best.
They are not atheists, because they know it can only be understood as the creation of God.

Maybe we athesits have way too much book learnin' for our own good. I meam we all wear "coke bottle bottom glasses" right?

Later,
ElectEngr

Grumpy

Take these lethally toxic molecules, just loaded with H's:





...And the deadly (but tasty) C6H12O6.

Of course, being mildly poisonous doesn't stop us from appreciating C8H10N4O2 (caffeine) or C7H8N4O2 (theobromine - chocolate).

I also have to point out that water is no longer considered an element.

Jinto

LOL.

Conchobar

I missed the joke until seeing again. I fell for it. Flurpy, you put one over on me. It is Monty Pythonish humour. My apologies. I was on call and sleepless for 20 hours. I am rested now, and feel like a gomeral.

Conchobar

Shinobi

damn, I though he was serious too.

Thats the thing with sarcastic theism, its hard to spot because there are real theists that are that lame.

Defiant Heretic

1 The cosmologic argument, or the argument from effect to cause. Every building is proof of the existence of a master builder or an architect. The cosmos is this building.
The latter is an unproved assertion. We know that buildings were constructed because we (humans) are the ones who constructed them. We have no evidence to suggest that the cosmos were constructed by a conscious builder.

2 The argument from the existence of the notion of God in our minds. We do not have in our minds any concept that is not a true or deformed reflection of reality. If God had never been perceived, the notion could not have penetrated and anchored so tenaciously in the human mind.
I am now envisioning an invisible pink unicorn. She knows all and never lies. She is telling me that your god does not exist. However, we have a concept of God in our mind, so if concept equals reality, then he must both exist and not exist. There is a contradiction here, so the premise must be invalid.

3 The teleologic argument. All things in this world tend toward a purpose--the embryo in the womb, the seeds, the solar system, symbiosis (complementary activities) between unrelated species.
This is an assertion, not evidence. You need to explain why you think they serve a purpose.

4 The historic argument. Earliest archeological records have shown the existence of religious belief. In history there is a natural selection of ideas. What is unfit is discarded. The persistence of the notion of God despite millenniums of social change proves its value.
The early archaeological records show that cultures believed in gods other than yours. If they were right, then your god does not exist.

5 The moral argument. If only the smartest and physically fittest survive, how is it that love and meekness, and mercy survive?
How is it that there is a conscience?
Societies that work together are more likely to survive than those that do not. Cooperation is a survival trait.

6 The argument from movement. Perpetual motion is impossible. Everything in the universe is in constant motion. There must be an agent which started and maintains the movement.
Actually, the motion is variable, but that's not important right now. Perpetual motion cannot exist unless there is some form of energy being put into the system. There are several forms of energy that can provide momentum, such as gravity and magnetism.

7 The argument from prophecies. The Bible presents long-term detailed time foretelling of events, most of which have been fulfilled, esp. concerning the birth, life, crucifixion, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. The unfulfilled prophecies deal with the end of the world and the return of the Lord Jesus Christ to this planet.
Dune tells of prophesies concerning the Kwizatz Haderach that came true. That doesn't mean they actually happened. The prophesies and the events themselves are told only in that book. The argument is only valid if the book is true, and so this argument proves nothing.

8 The argument from thought at its highest level. In times of great emotion or danger when all the mental powers of man are concentrated thoughts turn toward God.
They never have for me. Maybe I've never been emotional enough, or in enough danger.

9 The argument from the existence of the function of faith. The existence of a sense organ is proof that there exists the reality to be perceived through this organ. Man has the organ of faith in metaphysical realities. It could have never been developed and retained if there were not the reality perceived through it.
The "organ of faith"? What on earth are you talking about? Faith isn't a sense. It's a belief that isn't supported by evidence.

10 The argument from the bias of the human mind. We can test every thought except the thought with which we test. We cannot rely on our fallible minds alone. We are doomed to error without a higher revelation. Atheism has no revelation from higher spheres and therefore is not reliable. Christianity has a higher revelation telling us that God exists.
Christianity only has this higher revelation if God exists and is providing Christians with information. You need to prove these two things before your argument is valid. Otherwise, it's safe to assume that your argument is just another result of fallible human thought.

11 The argument from the fact of contingency. Everything changeable and transitory is contingent. Things appear and disappear. It can be and also can not be. Consequently, it must have a cause outside of itself. A world of contingency presupposes a supreme being who exists necessarily, who could NOT "NOT be", who has no cause outside of Himself. He is without dependency. He can not cease to exist. Existence is His nature.
You are arguing that God exists because he must exist? Prove that God must exist, then.

12 The argument from the laws of nature. It is conceivable that laws should exist without a lawgiver and law enforcer. Science discovers these laws; it does not create them.
Indeed it does not. Perhaps you would like to provide some evidence that God did?

13 The argument from exceptions to the laws of nature. Water is the only element which gets larger when it freezes, making ice lighter than water, thereby preserving aquatic life. All combinations of hydrogen are poisonous except water, which is essential for life. This is the handiwork of God.
Wouldn't the conclusion, "Life exists because the conditions favor it" be just as valid, if not more so?
(Oh, and sugar is composed of hydrogen, and it isn't poisonous.)

14 The argument from miracles. There are documented medical records of instantaneous supernatural healing. A miracle is the temporary suspension of the laws of nature.
Documented where? Provide references, please.

15 The argument from the expansion of the universe. Scientists know the rate of expansion of the universe. By calculating backwards in time they can come to the point of departure. The expansion of the universe is proof of the existence of God who determined its beginning.
The speed of expansion is increasing. If the change in speed is constant, then at one time, it was stationary. Regardless of this, "God...determined its beginning" does not follow from "they can come to the point of departure".

16 The argument from the 2nd law of thermodynamics. In a closed system matter can only progress from order to randomness, chaos, anarchy. If our universe had been in existence from eternity past, it would be in chaos. The universe is orderly only because it proceeds from a God of order.
The expansion of the universe prevents this 'heat death' from occurring. (Scientific American Volume 12, Number 2)

17 The argument from the existence of genes. The lack of information and intelligence in acids (DNA) cannot communicate to genes how to develop intelligence in humans or instinct in animals. Genes are proof of a Creator.
And do you have any evidence that DNA cannot create a mind capable of intelligence and instinct?

18 The argument from the existence of radioactive elements. By losing electrons, radioactive elements pass from stage to stage until they are degraded to the point where they become lead. Scientists know how long it takes for one element to change to the next in the order of filiation, eventually becoming lead. If the universe existed from eternity or billions of years, there would be no radioactive elements. We live in a created, relatively young universe.
Or possibly one in which heavier elements are created by nuclear fusion in stars...

19 The argument from the existence of black holes. Black holes are collapsing stars (absorbing light and energy) where the laws of matter and time are no longer valid. At the border between the point where light is reflected and where it is absorbed is timelessness or eternity. This defies the atheist belief that the only reality is our space-time continuum.
It has been speculated that the physical laws we know of do not apply in a black hole, but as far as I know, this has not been substantiated. Even granting this, it does not follow that there is a reality outside 'our space-time continuum' (which is merely an extension of the Cartesian coordinate system, if I am not mistaken. x, y, z, and time.)

20 The argument from the gradation found in all things. There are things that are good, better, and best. The best of all if God.
The metaphysical argument of Anselm of Canterbury. When you say God does not exist, you mean the being than which a greater cannot be conceived. But He must have existence, otherwise a greater could be conceived. Since God is perfect and all powerful, what could cause Him not to exist? If God is conceivable, His nonexistence is inconceivable.
'Good' is a relative measurement. What one person considers to be good is not necessarily what another would consider to be good. Besides, if God does not exist, and existence is required to be the greatest thing, then something else becomes the greatest thing. God wouldn't just pop into existence in order to fulfill the last requirement.

21 The argument from the composition of all entities in nature. Everything composed services something other than itself. The composed thing proves the existence of the Composer.
The witness of the best exemplars of mankind. Contrast the witness of the lives of the 12 disciples (almost all were martyred) to the atheists. The atheists' witnesses are the greatest criminals of the human race: Stalin, Khrushchev, Brezhnev, Tito, Mao Tse-Tung, and Karl Marx, among others. What impartial judge would have any difficulty deciding for the existence of God when one has to choose between these two groups of witnesses.
Do the beliefs of Hitler, Torquemada, Pope Urban II, Mary Tudor, Fred Phelps, etc invalidate Christianity? Of course not. Neither would the beliefs of those men invalidate atheism, even if they were 'witnesses' for it. In reality, their crimes had little or nothing to do with their atheism. In contrast, the crimes of every one of the people I mentioned was directly tied to their theism.
(And what did Marx ever do that was so evil? Don't confuse Marx with Stalin. The latter was a murderer. The former was a philosopher.)

22 The witness of men of science. http://www.icr.org/idx-txt.htm
You posted the wrong link. That goes to the Institute of Creation Research, an organization that requires its members to sign a statement of faith. The scientific method requires the scientist to form beliefs based solely on the evidence, not on preconceptions.

23 The proof from great art. We're all aware of the great religious motifs in paintings, sculptures, and musical masterpieces. Has even one great work been inspired by the denial of God?
I've always been partial to Twain's writings. Besides, the concept of God being used as the subject of an artwork does not mean he exists. Does Botticelli's Birth of Venus prove that the goddess exists?

24 The witness of farmers. Atheism is the child of city-dwellers who are enclosed within walls and perceive the universe through grimy windowpanes. They do not see the universe as it really is. Farmers who live in close communion with nature know it best.
They are not atheists, because they know it can only be understood as the creation of God.
And you have statistics that state that no farmers are atheists? (Farmers might also have less access to educational institutions if they don't live near any cities. Keep that in mind if you turn out to be correct.)

25 The witness of animals. Professor Dr. James Gould from Princeton University put a dish with syrup at a distance from a honeycomb. After the bees discovered the syrup, he moved the dish 1.25 times the distance from the honeycomb in comparison with the first time. At the third experiment, the distance was 1.25 times as big as at the second and so on, until the dish arrived to be 900 meters away from the honeycomb. But when Prof. Gould arrived in this place, he had a surprise: the bees had been there before him and had waited for the syrup. The bees knew that the distance increases each time with a factor of 1.25, and had calculated where the dish would be next. Some animal abilities are without explanation, unless God thinks for them.
Bees can count, therefore God exists? This could be used as an example in logic textbooks when they cover the non-sequitor.

26 The proof from the satisfaction of our needs. For all basic human needs there exists a reality apart from men. Reality always corresponds to our fundamental needs. Our desire for happiness so far exceeds our experiences that it is inconceivable that there is not a God to meet our hope for a future paradise.
Let me see if I understand your argument. All human needs are always satisfied. Some human needs have not been satisfied. Therefore, they will be satisfied later. Do you notice an internal contradiction here, by any chance?

27 The proof from artificial satellites. Our satellites, though requiring intricate calculations and complex instruments, have short endurance. Yet they are amazing achievements. Could they have simply happened without designers. The earth is a satellite, yet during all of its years it has never deviated or been sucked into the sun. God has chartered and maintained the paths of the celestial bodies.
Countless objects most likely have impacted the sun or flown off into space. A few formed stable orbits. Even then, they have not been protected. There is evidence that the Earth was impacted by a large asteroid or comet which caused a mass extinction 65,000,000 years ago. When the Earth and moon become tidally locked, the ecosystem will change radically, making life difficult if not impossible. Eventually, the Earth and everything on it will be burned up when the sun turns into a red giant.

28 The proof from automated industry. Behind automation exists the engineer who conceived it and calculated it. During the operation there is a worker in command. The universe appears to function automatically, but don't be deceived. Its builder and maker is God.
So if something appears to be automatic, it must have an engineer and operator? And you're basing this entirely on one example? This proves nothing.

29 The proof from answered prayers. Prayers made in impossible situations when all seemed lost, humanly speaking, have been answered, sometimes in remarkable ways. If not so, prayer would have long ago become extinct along with many superstitions that have vanished. Fulfilled prayers are proof of a Divine Listener.
Could you post a few examples of fulfilled prayers? (It would be preferable if they were well documented and involved things that couldn't happen naturally.)

30 The argument from the need for an eternal mind. The mind organizes the impressions it receives daily through the senses and creates out of them a universe. The mind puts all the events it perceives through the senses into the categories of quantity, quality, causality, modality, and finality. When there was no human mind, where was the universe? There must have always have been a mind to conceive the universe. This eternal mind is God.
You're saying that the universe only exists because we perceive it? Do you have any evidence at all to support this?

31 The proof from the existence of evil. For every action there is an opposite and equal reaction. The existence of suffering proves the existence of sin, which in turn proves the existence of justice, goodness, righteousness, and godliness. Try to prove that a child has no father by the fact that his father spanked him.
First, "for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction" applies to physics, not abstract concepts.
Second, you need to demonstrate that there is a causal relation between suffering and 'sin'.

32 The argument from one's faith. As one advances toward Truth in his thought processes, his inner doubts begin to disappear. As a man becomes more like Jesus, he knows his faith to be real. As a man lives out the Book of Proverbs, his life confirms his knowledge of God.
No, it confirms that he's sure that God exists (sort of). Just because doesn't have doubts, doesn't mean he's right. Were Jim Jones' followers right? They certainly believed in him.

33 The argument from the impossibility of proving the contrary. Unless a person has been everywhere; and has seen, heard, smelt, tasted, and felt everything; and has lived forever; that person cannot prove that there is no God. This means that atheism can never be proved.
Which is, of course, why it is the responsibility of the person making a positive assertion to provide evidence for it. They've made a nice attempt here, but haven't accomplished this goal.

Radcliffe Emerson

The Christian by their own definition is almost agnostic.
One on hand, the Christian says God cannot be known. If something cannot be known, how can its existence be known?
This is agnostisicm.
The universe is subject to a set of natural laws. Nothing can exist outside those natural laws.
Religion in general defines 'god' usually as something outstide the realm of the universe. Something that is invisible, and has to be 'experienced.'
How does one know that "god" is talking to them? It's your own mind talking, not a god.
That woman in Texas claims she killed her kids because 'god' told her to, to keep them from satan.
Now, Christians will say, that can't be god, god would never tell someone to do something like that.
Excuse me? The god of the Old Testament constantly exhorts his 'divine followers' to murder other people, men, women and infants, for a multitude of stupid reasons.
And the wonderful Jesus, the prince of peace, says the world in the end will be horrible, that everyone left will be subjected to all forms of torture, death, cast into fire, etc, all for merely not believing he is the almighty dog's, I mean god's son.
Pure, pathetic b.s. written by lunatics.