KnightWhoSaysNi

I can't speak for all non-theists on what they think of these "compelling" arguments, but I'll try to provide some brief rejoinders:

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.

A building is a "thing", the universe is not. It is "all there is." Why can't the universe be an uncaused brute fact? If you think God is eternal, why can't the universe be?

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.

Can't one say that the "notion of God" is simply an invention of our minds?

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.

Evolution by natural selection has a way to make things look purposeful, but that purpose is survival and passing your genes on. Gravity has a way clumping things up and forming planets, stars, and stuff on their own. Are gravity and natural selection "intelligent"?

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.

I still don't see how this follows. Having a "persisent notion" throughout history doesn't prove a metaphysical truth claim.

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?

My chances of survival would be a lot better in a society that values love, meekness, and mercy. Why can't behaviour like this evolve culturally, based on social survival?

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.

Why must this 'agent' be a god?

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.

But are they "prophecies"? What if these so-called "prophecies" are after-the-fact predictions, really vague, easily fulfilled (e.g. an earthquake will happen in our lifetime), or not even prophecies at all (i.e. out of context).

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.

There are indeed some 'atheists in foxholes'.

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.

But what if one person has faith Allah spoke to him, and another claims the Virgin Mary spoke to him? Are they both right?

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.

But can't the notion of a 'higher revelation' be a product of our fallible minds?

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.

See my comments above regarding the cosmological argument.

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.

Natural laws are not the same as human laws. How could there be a 'law enforcer' if it's impossible to even break the law. See my comments regarding the cosmological argument again.

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.

Everything was fine until you said "this is the handiwork of God". This is kind of like saying, "pizza tastes good if you include tomato sauce. This is because Jim Kirk's a great starship captain."

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.

Better tell James Randi so they can collect their million. The 'documented medical records' have always been debunked by skeptics under scrutiny.

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.

It goes back in time to a singularity. Why must we assume a supernatural agent for the singularity? Why can't the singularity be a brute cosmic fact or a quantum vacuum fluctuation?

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 universe is ~14 billions years old and hasn't provided enough time for complete and total entropy.

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.

Why can't natural selection and mutation provide this information?

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.

I'm not knowledgable enough with astrophysics to comment, but this argument conflicts with argument #15, regarding Big Bang cosmology (14 billion year old age of the universe).

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.

Huh? Why must that be an 'atheist belief'? Einstein happened to be an atheist, by the way.

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.

When you say Paradise Island does not exist, you mean the place that which a greater place cannot be conceived. But it must have existence, otherwise a greater could be conceived. Since Paradise Island is perfect and all beautiful, what could cause it not to exist? If Paradise Island is conceivable, its nonexistence is inconceivable.

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.

See comments again on cosmological argument.

22 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.

The " these bad people were atheists, therefore atheism is false" is an extremely bad argument. By that logic, theism is false because of Osama bin Laden, Jim Jones, Ayatollah Khohmeini, the Klu Klux Clan, the Taliban, the Nazis (most Nazis were Catholic and Lutheran), Christian Reconstructionists, the perpetrators of the Inquisition and Crusades, etc...

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

Witness of men of Pseudoscience you mean, if they're from the ICR. This is merely an argument from authority. According a poll I saw, 60% of scientists didn't believe in a god. Would you take that as a proof for atheism?

24 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?

How many painting, sculptures, and musical masterpieces can you think of that have been inspired by something other than God?

25 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.

I've actually met farmers who are atheists. Naturalists are often close to nature too. Charles Darwin spent a long time studying nature, and look what that got him.

26 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.

I'm not familiar with that experiment or know much about bee entomology, but how does that prove a god? Even if true, don't you think that's claiming a 'god of the gaps' explanation?

27 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.

In other words, the argument for wishful thinking. I wish I had $1000000, but it ain't gonna happen.

28 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.

Uh oh, somebody tell Newton that's been wrong all along!

29 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.

Again, if God can be thought of as uncaused, then why can't the universe be considered uncaused?

30 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.

But what about all the unfulfilled prayers?

31 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.

How does not conceiving of something make it nonexistent?

32 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.

This assumes that morality is not a manifestation of human development and culture. The child must have hit his ass on the door.

33 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.

As one advances toward Truth in his thought processes, his inner doubts begin to disappear. As a man becomes more like Mohammed, he knows his faith to be real. As a man lives out the Holy Qur'an, his life confirms his knowledge of Allah.

34 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.

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 Invisible Pink Unicorn. This means that aIPUism can never be proved.

The burden of proof's on the theist.

Tenek

Wow. Argument from the laws of nature and Argument from the exceptions to the laws of nature and Argument from Miracles. I think that neatly takes out all possible middle ground...

Definitely a Humor-worthy thread.

Mageth

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.

This guy needs to brush up on Memetic theory. Ideas persist and propagate because they're "fit" at persisting and propagating, not necessarily because they have "value", though that may play a part.

Slavik91

ALLAH! LEPRICAHNS! UNICORNS! DRAGONS! ZUES! ORCS! SLAVIK'S THIRD TESTICEL!

Conchobar

[QUOTE]Originally posted by flurpy2
Found this compelling arguments for god's existence at http://home.mindspring.com/~apostle2/35proofs.htm

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.

First of all is that Chaos Theory shows that order can come out of Chaos. A solution of copper sulfate in water is blue. When it evaporates it leaves a very complex fractal crystaline pattern that would challenge the best artist to copy. And it is due to the natural ionic chemical binding properties of Copper ions to SO4 or sulfate ions. God is nowhere to be seen. The natural properties of matter cause the effect. And finally there is no evidence for a god, and if there were a god and everything has a cause then what caused God, and what caused the cause of god.........

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.

Rubbish. We can also conceive of 100 metre long purple frogs with eight eyes and four wings. That doesn't make them real. Man perceived or invented gods/spirits out of ignorance of the natural world. He couldn't explain a bubbling spring or a volcano so he put gods in them. Later he merged the gods into one. History shows this process of god invention and merging. Yet God is not visible, audible, tangible, measurable, or identifiable by any means. His only property is the ability to seem non-existent? Doesn't the Law of Parsimony make that explanation most likely, that if it looks non-existent, sounds non-existent, feels non-existent, and appears on no metre or radar screen, then it must be non-existent.

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.

Naturalistic evolution with natural selection and genetic coding nicely explains all of this.

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.

Religion is just a substitution of magical answers when true science was far in the future. Today 80% of humans are still religious. But that is not surprising in that only about 20% are science literate. Today, nations with high rates of science literacy have the highest rates of Atheism (Netherlands, Scotland, France, Russia, Hungary, Czech Republic, Germany, England, Sweden, Norway, Finland, New Zealand.) And the countries with the lowest rates of science literacy have the highest religiosity indices (USA, South Africa, N. Ireland, Paraguay, Bolivia, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Indonesia.) God is just the imaginary explanation invented by ignorant tribal and stone age people to explain complex phenomena. Today, many people are still incapable of complex analysis and religion remains their world view. Note the study a few years back of 18 nations industrialised (the USA was most religious of all, and ranked 18th on 12th grade science and math scores.


5 The moral argument. If only the smartest and physically fittest survive, how is it that love and meekness, and mercy survive?

You don't even understand evolution and natural selection. Survival is not just the smartest or strongest. It is those best able to adapt to an environment, evade predators or find pray. It may be intelligence, armour plating, giant size, speed, flight, sharp teeth, or that they taste awful to predators.

How is it that there is a conscience?

Conscience and morality evolved because man is a group or social animal. Moral behaviours were beneficial to the tribe, held it together. Man was a weak animal versus lions or hyenas, but as a group devoted to each other humans will sacrifice themselves by fighting the lion while the group seeks safety and take the young away. This altruism protects the defender's genes even though he knows he will die. He wants his wife and children to survive. It evolved as man found group safety which itself depended on the altruistic sacrificial 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.

Bad argument. Evidence is that the universe is expanding endlessly and will eventually burn out to total darkness in another 13 billion years or so. The universe apparently started with a singularity or Big Bang. There is no reason for whatever caused it to be a god. It may well have been a natural process. In fact, if god is defined as self-aware, conscious, and intelligent he has properties not needed. Animals only have consciousness and intelligence. We know of no exceptions. Animals need it for (a) Evading predators, (b) finding reproductive mates, (c) finding food. God presumably does not have any predators who want to eat him. God does not want to reproduce or being all immortal the universe would have a googolplex of gods. God is immortal, so he doesn't need to eat anything. Therefore he does not need intelligence or even consciousness. Things tend not to have unnecessary properties, eh?

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.

All prophesies are vague and ambiguous. I have studied the Bible extensively. The Bible does not predict Jesus, his life, the crucifixion or resurrection. You are thinking of Mithra the god-man of virgin birth of Zoroastrianism. The Zoroastrian god impregnated a virgin who had Mithra (God and human), who was killed and resurrected. He brought saving grace and verified immortality to Zoroastrians and many Romans. Paul of Tarsus changed his name to Jesus and invented his form of christianity. You are a Pagan and didn't know it. Mithra did it all some 400 years before the mythical Jesus.

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.

Simply wrong. I was in great danger in the Falklands Islands War but I never thought about turning to God. I was calling for British Army artillery fire on the Argentine positions.

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.

Hallucinations are more the mark of insanity than metaphysical reality. Metaphysical like states occur in temporal epileptic seizures of course and many from drugs.

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.

Again hallucinations are not more reliable than reason.

This is too time consuming and no real challenge to refute this rubbish. Enough. Flurpy take those pills the nurse gives to you. Don't "cheek" them and spit them out later.

Conchobar

Jobar

From Flurpy's laughing smilie at the top of his post, I think he is fully aware of how ridiculous all of these arguments are, so Conchobar, you may owe him a small apology for mis-reading him.

But this one I just *have* to comment on:

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

My comment is:

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!Hahahahahha...

[gasp][gasp]

Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!

Oh, my sides!!!

Felstorm

How about.

All thirty five of them are based upon nothing.

Absolutely nothing.

If this god exists then how come it's been 2000 years and we haven't had one goddamned Chrsitian that has been able to perform a miracle as per Jesus command in the gospels? Hmm? Where are those "works greater than I have accomplished?"

Do some miracles. Drink the poison. Or STFU.

Big Spoon

They're all crap. I've seen the majority of them refuted 100 times, and the rest I could refute myself.

Aravnah Ornan

I was once in an inerrantist church where the pastor read the verse about drinking the poison and said, "That's the way it should be." Sorry, but the Bible says that's the way it will be. You can't both believe in the inerrancy of the Bible and reinterpret it on the fly to smooth over any oopses.

Shinobi

Looks like a hit and run preacher post.

I challange you to come back and pick one of these "arguments" and defend it.

Please.....You obviously havn't been around here long, we smack down this stuff in our sleep.