Not all Christians are supercilious, of course. Many are
content to live and let live, and some even grant that science (despite
its lack of supernatural entities) does some good. But Christianity as
an organized, evangelizing movement has been on the offensive lately.
Witness the new wave of evangelicals and their leaders such as Rick
Warren, Lee Strobel, and William Lane Craig with their aggressive
stance against scientific materialism and their bestselling books
attempting to refute science. So, assuming you're an atheist, what do
you say to the theist who asks, "You don't (chuckle) believe in a god (snicker)?"

Anybody familiar with the original article will see that the
preceding paragraph is the same paragraph as the opening to "How to
Respond to a Supercilious Atheist" by Alan Roebuck. By changing a few
words, the same attack can be launched right back at him, and the rest
of the article isn't much better. It appears to be a primer in
projection. After all, when in doubt, just accuse them of being just like you.

Roebuck advises his fellow theists to take a different approach to
defending the faith-instead of coming up with actual evidence, you
should just tell atheists how our worldview is the one that is based on
assumptions and presuppositions. He eschews using the First Cause
argument and the defense of miracles because, "No matter what evidence
you give, the supercilious atheist finds a way to dismiss it." I wonder
if he has ever considered that it may be dismissed because it is not
valid evidence.

The First Cause argument doesn't work because, at best, it can only
be used to show that something created the universe, and that something
is not necessarily Yahweh. It could be another god or a multitude of
gods. Even that is questionable, though, due to the fact that they have
yet to show that the universe itself is contingent upon some necessary
being and not the necessary "being" itself. I would also advise theists
to drop this argument from their arsenal, but not in favor of Roebuck's
plan.

Roebuck states that, "it is not the case that your evidence
for God is valid but nevertheless is cancelled out by his superior
evidence against God." Gee, Sherlock, where can I find this "evidence
against God?" How about the absolute penury of evidence for god?
Theists have not yet grasped the concept of the burden of proof,
apparently. It's really simple, so I find it astounding that it is so
easily dismissed-the one who makes the positive claim (ie-god exists)
is the one who has to prove that claim, not the person who is in the
default position of suspension of belief due to lack of evidence (ie-as
far as we know, god does not exist). As much as I hate to be the bearer
of bad news, if you believe something without sufficient evidence, you are irrational.

Roebuck claims that atheism's vulnerability lies in the "false
worldview" that we hold that only material, objectively verifiable
things exist. First of all, this is not true. Not all atheists are
scientific materialists. There are many who believe lots of different
wacky theories that don't involve a god and there are others with other
notions of how the universe operates. This argument is only applicable
to a portion of atheists who also hold a materialistic worldview.

Roebuck then claims that scientific materialists assume this and
have come to their conclusion before examining the evidence. (Is the
projection evident yet?) The only evidence that exists is physical,
material, verifiable, and falsifiable. The existence of god is none of
the above. Any religious statement can be considered factually
meaningless by virtue of the fact that it doesn't meet the
falsifiability criterion. The only assumptions being made here are that
god exists and it's up to atheists to disprove that. Obviously, Roebuck
doesn't understand that this is impossible, and that is the very reason
why we can say that no evidence for such an entity exists.

He uses an example of a blind man dismissing the existence of color
because he cannot sense it, and likens that to the atheist who can't
sense god. First of all, the blind man knows he is blind. He recognizes
this sensory deficiency and doesn't believe that everybody on earth is
also blind. Furthermore, Roebuck is demonstrating his lack of
understanding of the functioning of the brain by asserting that color
exists in some more than abstract sense. Color appears as it does to us
in the small portion of the light spectrum that we are able to
perceive. For other creatures, the world around them is entirely
different, and we can study how this process operates, what causes
disorders such as blindness or the inability to perceive color and from
where it stems.

Is Roebuck suggesting here that atheists suffer from a sensory
deficiency as well? Does he believe that theists have been endowed with
a "sixth sense" that enables them to make contact with the
supernatural? If so, I'd like him to demonstrate what part of our
anatomy is causing this problem so that it can be rectified. Blindness
stems from either the brain or the eye itself not operating properly.
Where does "spiritual blindness" originate? Seen as how all of our
senses are processed in the brain, and also have an external organ by
which the information is received, he should be able to show where our
malfunction is occurring.

Roebuck claims that the theist must challenge our "assumptions" to
properly expose the atheist as a pedant, and says that first we have to
define our criteria for making the determination that there is no valid
reason to believe in god and how we know they are correct. He must be
talking to different atheists than I, as most people that I know would
respond with the criteria being objectively verifiable evidence, and
that we know this method of validation to be the most accurate due to
hundreds of years of making advancements as a society thanks to the
scientific method.

He moves on to what kind of evidence would be needed to verify the
occurrence of an actual miracle. This would be a difficult question
because most people with a scientific mindset would not know what it
would take because even unexplained phenomena could potentially be
explained in the future. Not knowing the answer right now doesn't imply
that the answer is unknowable. Besides, an omniscient, omnipotent being
would know exactly what was necessary and could provide it if he chose.
Unless, of course, we are his "vessels of wrath" created only to go to
hell and demonstrate god's wonderful mercy.

He again misconstrues the position of atheists who allow for the
possibility of the supernatural, although I personally feel that any
knowledge of such a plane of existence is impossible to ascertain, by
positing, "How do you know that a super-naturalistic explanation,
involving a God who intervenes from time to time, cannot be the correct
explanation? Wouldn't one have to be, for all intents and purposes,
omniscient in order to know that God could not have been involved?" We
don't know for sure that it couldn't be the correct explanation, and he
is shifting the goalpost from his particular god to "a
super-naturalistic explanation." This is a common tactic in
apologetics, and it should be pointed out that he doesn't know that the
supernatural being that started it all wasn't Zeus. As far as the
omniscience goes, we can answer that we do not have to be omniscient to
say that at this time, there is no evidence for such a being and no
need to appeal to one. Making up an answer when there is none is called
argumentum ad ignorantium.

He attempts to take on the issue of the logical contradictions
inherent in the attributes that his god is given but misses most of the
salient points. He deals momentarily with omnipotence and claims that
god can do "anything that can be done." Didn't god make the rules to
begin with? Could he not have made them different than they are? What's
the point of having an omnipotent creator of the universe who was
beholden to some other rules, and from where or whom did those mandates
come?

He dedicates a measly three sentences to theodicy, and just says
that a god who allows evil for some unknown reason could exist, but
never ties it back into the real contradiction, which is how could that
god be considered omnibenevolent? Again, god either created atheists
specifically to be tortured for all eternity by no fault of their own,
having been given the gift of faith or not, or he just chooses not to
intervene for some mysterious reason. Either way, how can one argue
that this being loves me? He will send me to hell purposely, either
because it's my destiny, or because he just doesn't intervene because
we need faith, which is a gift from him that we are supposed to somehow
give ourselves. That's not circular or anything.

He moves on to what he calls "arguing presuppositionally", and
gives an inadequate explanation of an axiom, which he then changes
slightly to allow for the existence of god to be a non-axiomatic axiom.
He claims that all knowledge is based upon one foundational principle
that cannot be proven, but is intuited. He is muddying the waters here
by the use of the word "intuit", as an axiom is just something that is
self-evident. I feel he chose that word for the specific purpose of
misleading the reader and priming them for the upcoming shift in
definition.

He claims that axioms can be tested by deducing whether or not the
system is "logically, morally, and existentially consistent." He
asserts that the atheist worldview fails because the "nature of
knowledge cannot be validated empirically." People have many different
epistemological views, and the use of scientific methodology to
determine the validity of anything is necessarily going to have some
starting point and then system of experimentation. That is all we have
with which to work, and he is attempting to negate the materialist
worldview by using a point that he himself believes regarding his
own-that not everything can be empirically validated.

He claims that one cannot live a purely naturalistic life as that
implies that you define your own meaning, and that makes everybody's
meaning invalid. We couldn't "stick to it when the going gets rough." I
have no idea what kind of data he is using to determine this, but the
search for meaning is an individual endeavor-even for the religious.
People may claim that they "live for god", but in reality, nobody does.
If all they are living for is the promise of an afterlife in paradise,
then they logically would all just commit suicide to get there faster.
Instead, what we observe is christians not following the dictates of
their own belief system and living their daily lives in much the same
way that we heathens do. They also use their families, their
responsibilities, their hopes, dreams, and future endeavors as
"meaning." Being handed a blanket "meaning" for your existence only
serves to cheapen the very concept.

He claims the existence of god is axiomatic, but cannot be
"intuited" like other axioms. These are, after all, "subtle and cosmic
questions." If it is not self-evident, it is not an axiom. Period. He
says that any proposition "must be judged true or false in light of
what we already know to be true." I'm with him there, but how on earth
does that prove the existence of god as axiomatic? His writing goes
from merely ignorant to absurd at this point.

Perhaps the most amusing quote is this one: "...some people are
content to believe without having any proof of their beliefs, and you
can't argue with someone like that." You're telling me. Again, this is
an example of projection at its finest. He claims that theism excels at
"accounting for the facts of reality", but I'm not sure exactly what
type of reality to which he refers. Reality is that which can be
observed and generally agreed upon. Imaginary sky-daddys don't fall
into that category.

His final snafu is that he comes around full-circle to admit that
the foundation of religious belief is faith-that which is believed but
cannot be proven. Did he not just spend 5 pages attempting to prove
that his god belief is logically superior to a naturalistic worldview?
I feel as if I missed the middle ten pages of this argument and walked
into the conclusion of a completely different one. He claims that by
pointing out our assumptions, theists can claim victory over atheists,
but all he is really saying here is that he has the opinion that we do
the same thing that they do. If that's true, why is it acceptable for
them and not for us? It seems to be a very odd contradiction to say
that atheists are wrong because we work from our presuppositions, but
then to base your own worldview on presuppositions. How exactly can you
determine whose presuppositions are correct? If they cannot be proven,
how can anybody know? Given his own argumentation, how does he know
that our supposed presuppositions, while I don't believe that a
naturalistic worldview implies presuppositions, aren't the correct
ones? Can we not take every argument here and turn it around on
religion with no difficulty?

To put the nail in the coffin, his endnotes declare that the true
impediment to our belief is that we hate god. This laughable notion is
constantly used against us and is by far the most ridiculous assertion
in their repertoire. It is nothing short of an attack that attempts to
discredit our use of rationality by claiming that it is an emotional
issue at its core. If anybody is rationalizing their emotions, it is
the theist whose fear of death overwhelms him to the point that he
makes up fairy tales to assuage the constant anxiety that life in an
unknown, unpredictable universe can induce. This article was a pathetic
attempt to discredit atheism, or more accurately, scientific
materialism, by ascribing to it all of the properties of religion. That
alone is enough to demonstrate the intellectual vacuity of their
belief.

A question that has been pondered for thousands of years is “why are we here?”. No one really knows why life exists, or even why the universe exists for that matter. There have been plenty of explanations for the “how”, but the “why” is just a mystery.

One very popular explanation for why we are here is that there is a god who put us here. This god is so not just any god, but the one and only god. For this reason, we spell his name with a capital “G” (God).

God is omniscient (all-wise), omnipotent (all-powerful), and omnibenevolent (all-good). It’s safe to say that there is no being, force, or entity that is greater than God. However, if God exists, he put us here and there must be a reason… but what reason is that?

Well let’s examine what he asks of us. First, there are 10 commandments, which are rules that human beings must live by. This is a great idea, except that he didn’t give them to us at the beginning. He waited until everything got out of hand, and then decided to give them to Moses.

The first commandment states:

“Thou shalt have no other gods before me.”

• Before mentioning anything about how people shouldn’t kill each other, or steal, he mentions that people can only have him as a god. This shows, right away, where his priorities lie. It comes off as a bit selfish and jealous. What should it matter to such a supreme being if the people he created worship him or not? It seems like an awfully petty issue for a god to be concerned with.

Since this first commandment doesn’t seem to help anyone besides God, let’s move on to the second:

“Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.

• God is a jealous god who wants everyone to love him? That doesn’t sound like a description of the greatest being in the universe, it sounds more like an insecure teenage girl. What reason would such a being have to be jealous if that being is all-knowing, and knows there is no being greater than him? Also, notice he still hasn’t mentioned anything about killing or stealing because he just keeps talking about himself.

Let’s move on to the third, and hope that there is a something useful coming up:

“Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.

• Here, God is still giving instructions regarding himself, except this time sounds more like a little kid who is getting made fun of because his name sounds funny. Would it really matter to someone who had high self-esteem if someone used their name in vain? How is this arbitrary rule more important than making sure people don’t kill each other?

The fourth commandment is as follows:

“Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.”

• Now God wants us to set one day aside each week to worship him. This sounds similar to a girlfriend or wife who complains that her boyfriend or husband doesn’t compliment her enough. If this girl ruled the universe, I’m sure she would want everyone to spend 52 days each year gathering to compliment her too.

After the fourth commandment, God finally mentions that people can’t kill each other, steal from each other, and commit adultery. These things seem to be way too low on the list, but at least they eventually make the list.

Then comes a very surprising tenth commandment:

“Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour’s.”

• Thou shalt not covet? Isn’t that the same as saying thou shalt not be jealous? It’s almost as if God thinks we might have forgotten that he just told us how jealous he is in the second commandment. There might as well be an eleventh commandment that says “Thou shalt do as I say, not as I do.”

It’s amazing how half of the commandments are there to ensure that God’s feelings are never hurt, when “Thou shalt not rape” is completely left off the list.

So if there is a God, why did he create us? According to his list of rules he’s given us, it sounds like he created us to make him feel better about himself. He’s the most powerful being imaginable, yet he created human beings in order to have them worship him.

I am nowhere near as great as God is said to be, yet still I would never need as much reassurance as he requests. If the all-mighty God exists, and his ten commandments are true, then he is absolutely the most insecure being I have ever heard of.

Because there is no proof, not one shred, that a god of any sort exists. Be honest... there is no physical evidence. If there were evidence, there wouldn't be any need for faith. There is also no evidence of heaven, hell, a devil or demons, or angels, or an afterlife.

Because there is no need, or use for, a god.  A god is not necessary to explain the origins of things, or people, or morality-- there are rational, worldly explanations that actually make sense.

Because we cannot speculate on what a god is made of, or how he came into existence. We cannot imagine how he creates things and people, knows everything, or why he did what he allegedly did. Because a god just doesn't make sense.

Because a good god would be useless if he were not powerful, and a powerful god would not deserve worship unless he is good-- but there is no all powerful, good god, otherwise there would be no imperfection or suffering in the world.

Because the bible, the most widespread "proof" of god, is unreliable as a source of accurate information.  It is internally inconsistent and contradictory, historically wrong, and filled with deep moral problems.  The bible cannot be considered or consulted in the question of whether or not there is a god. It is no evidence at all.

Because the history of god-belief is rife with ignorance, superstition, intolerance, persecution, cruelty and hatred.  Those people believed just as firmly in their faith as anyone alive today. This makes it more likely that religion was invented by people who wanted to control other people.

Because theology has fought and resisted nearly every major scientific discovery. Instead of embracing new knowledge, religion fears  it.  Religion resist liberty and reform, and freedom of information and freedom of thought.

Because god-belief was invented in the earliest days of man's ignorance. People did not know anything yet. They thought the world was flat, that disease, hurricanes, earthquakes, thunder and droughts were all caused by gods. It is unbelievable that primitive man guessed wrongly about everything else, but discovered "the truth" about the origin of life.  It is more believable that god(s) were invented by primitive people for the following reasons:

• to explain natural events that they couldn't understand
• they had an inability to cope with their fears of a death that was final and absolute
• they had a need to provide enforceable laws with divine penalties
• they had a child-like need to feel watched over and protected by a loving, powerful father-figure

Another reason for the continuation of religion is that the positions of power held by holy men depended on the beliefs of their followers.

Because everything that science has now described in detail were previously believed to be the exclusive handiwork of god-- from the origins of life, to the cause of natural phenomena (earthquakes, lightning and volcanoes, in fact all of the natural world), to the formation of stars and our own world, to the causes of mental illness and diseases...virtually everything you can think of.  Religion retreats, loses ground, whenever a new fact is discovered.  No new discovery HAS EVER supported a religious explanation of ANYTHING.

Because there is no evidence of communication with a god of any kind.  Prayers are answered no more often than by flipping a coin, despite the fact it says in the bible that you need only ask, and ye shall receive.  People report having a personal relationship with god, but they cannot demonstrate that this is not merely their imaginations and self-delusion.

I am unconvinced, and all the threats of eternal damnation cannot convince me.

I'm like Doubting Thomas... I'll believe when I put my hand in Christ's side....  until then, no. When someone can tell me the following, then it would at least be possible to accept the existence of a god:

What God is made of?

What is "spirit" made of?

Where are heaven and hell?

How did God make everything, and from what did he make it?

Where did God come from?

Why did God exist alone in an empty nothingness for an eternity before creating the universe?

How can he continue to exist without ingesting some sort of energy?

How can he exist in every point of the universe at once?

How can he know everything, past present and future?

Where are souls kept within our bodies?

Where were our 'eternal' souls before we were born, (or how can immortality begin at conception)?

When someone can provide these answers, then I could believe.  Until then, my mind will not let me believe.  I have no choice.  I cannot accept that such an entity is possible.

The invisible and the nonexistent look very much alike.  When you come to realize why you do not believe in Zeus, you will understand why I do not believe in your god.

 

After watching this video I have found clear evidence that evolution is a fallacy. This is groundbreaking!

 

It's possible to keep the good parts of religion -- like the music, rituals and pageantry -- and get rid of the sex-hating dogma, the belief in god and other troublesome aspects.

November 20, 2009  |  

If religion really were just a metaphor, just a comforting and inspiring story that gives shape and meaning to people's lives... what might it look like?

One of the most common tropes among progressive religious believers is Religion As Metaphor. "Religious beliefs don't have to be literally true," the trope says. "They're just useful metaphors: stories that give shape and meaning to our lives."

I'm not buying it. I'm not buying it for one simple reason: If religion is just a story, then why does it upset people so much when atheists say it isn't true? Any more than it would upset a fan of "Alice in Wonderland" if someone told them it wasn't true?

I'm seriously not buying it. I think the "metaphor" trope is just a disingenuous way for believers to slip away from hard questions about their beliefs. But it's got me thinking: If religion really were just a story -- a story that people found comforting and inspiring, a story that people sincerely knew wasn't true but still enjoyed telling and re-telling -- what would that look like?

And would atheists have a problem with it?

I was debating the other day with a believer who was getting bent out of shape about how religion was just a story people found comforting. People didn't have to believe religion was literally true for it to make a difference in their lives, he insisted. So why was I being so intolerant and mean and trying to take it away? And it suddenly struck me:

The version of religion he's talking about?

It's Trekkies.

Think about it. Trekkies are devoted to a story that they find entertaining and inspiring, even though they know it isn't factually real. And there's great diversity in their devotions, similar to those among religious beliefs. Some Trekkies are intensely dedicated to the story, to the point where it takes up a substantial part of their lives: going to conventions, making costumes, buying memorabilia, watching the shows again and again. Others are more casual followers: watching the shows when they happen to come on, maybe taking in a convention or two. And different Trekkies follow different variants of the story. Some are more interested in the original show with Spock and Kirk; others care more about The Next Generation. Some weirdo fringe cultists even follow Voyager.

But they all have one thing in common: They know that "Star Trek" isn't real. Unless they're certifiably mentally ill, they know that the story they're devoted to was made up by people. And they act accordingly. Avid convention-goers don't treat casual fans as apostates; Original Showians don't treat Next Generationists as sinners and blasphemers; and none of them write editorials lambasting people as immoral sociopaths if they prefer documentaries to any sort of science fiction. And they -- okay, fine, we -- don't insist that "Star Trek" is just a story... and then get bent out of shape when people point out that it is a story, and hence that it's not true. Trekkies have a good time trying to fit the inaccuracies and inconsistencies into some sort of continuity (that's half the fun); but we understand that the show is a fictional story, with all the flaws that fiction is heir to, and we don't treat it as a divinely-inspired guide to reality and life.

That's what "it's just a metaphor" religion would look like.

And if religion looked like that, I would have no problem with it at all.

Now, if you're a religious believer, maybe you think this analogy is trivializing your faith. Maybe you think it's insulting to compare centuries of serious religious practice and thought to nerds wearing Spock ears at convention centers. So let's take a different example.

Let's take historical re-creation societies. Not re-enactors of real historical events like the Civil War, but re-creators of historical fiction. Let's take communities who like to act out the characters and worlds of Jane Austen, Charles Dickens, F. Scott Fitzgerald, J.R.R. Tolkien, William Shakespeare. Let's take communities who find these stories beautiful and inspiring, and who devote a significant portion of their lives to reading them, studying them, discussing them, re-imagining them, dressing up like the characters in them, and attending ritual and celebratory events dedicated to them.

You don't like that analogy, either? But those are wonderful stories! Rich, complex, highly respected stories! Stories with decades and even centuries of tradition behind them! Are you saying that historical re-enactors are giant nerds and that you resent being compared to them? How dare you insult my faith! I declare jihad!

I kid, of course. I do enjoy some occasional historical fiction re-creation events; but I'm not going to start a war, even an Internet flame war, defending them. (Although this kind of proves my point: if believers get offended at their religion being compared to other stories -- even if those stories are serious literature -- then the "religion is just a story" trope can't be very sincere.)

But I'm off on a tangent. Let's come back to the main point. And let's get a bit more serious. Let's look at a genuine, religiously- themed example of my Trekkie model of religion.

Let's look at secular Judaism.

For plenty of Jews, Judaism is much more of a cultural/ historical/ familial identity than a religious one. In fact, for many Jews, Judaism is entirely a cultural and historical and familial identity, and not a religious one at all. The phrase "atheist Jew" has a non-absurd, readily- comprehensible meaning... in a way that "atheist Baptist" doesn't. Many Jews cherrypick the Jewish rituals and stories that they like, and reject the ones they don't -- not as a slippery way of trying to shoehorn an obsolete and untenable faith into a modern worldview, but entirely openly and without shame or pretense, in an "I don't think God gives a damn about this, I don't even think God exists, this is all just mangled history at best and totally made-up at worst, so I have no qualms about picking the parts I like and ditching the rest" approach. Questioning the tenets and texts of Judaism is part of the rabbinical tradition, and many secular Jews view their selective observance, not as a rejection of the Jewish tradition, but as part of it. They treat sacred Jewish texts the way we all treat philosophers and political writers who aren't purportedly passing on the divine word of God: they read them critically, they embrace the ideas that make sense, they actively oppose the ideas that are barbaric, they ignore the ideas that seem silly.

Exactly the way "Star Trek" fans ignore and reject "Spock's Brain."

I guess I'm saying that secular Jews are the Trekkies of religion. And good on them. I'm totally serious. If I could convert to secular Judaism and not feel like an idiot, I'd seriously consider it. Secular Jews have found a way to (mostly) take what's good about religion and (mostly) leave what's bad about it. And that way is to not treat it as religion. That way is to not treat it as the divine word of God. That way is to treat it as a story: a fascinating story, a story with a powerful tradition behind it, a story worth telling and caring about and getting involved in... but a story. A story with parts that are inspiring and useful, and parts that are gruesome and ugly, and parts that are just plain batshit.

Now, there is, of course, an important difference between secular Judaism and Trekkies. And that's the deep, intense connection many secular Jews have with family and history. It's not just about being invested in the story, and the rituals connected with it. It's about the fact that the story and the rituals are ones that their parents and grandparents and great-grandparents and so on were invested in.

And of course, much of that investment has to do with how Jews and Judaism have historically been treated by the rest of the world. As a friend pointed out when I ran this piece by her: Plenty of Jews in Germany were very secular, didn't even particularly think of themselves as Jewish... but that didn't change how the Nazis saw them. Practicing the rituals of Judaism is a way of acknowledging this reality. And it's a way of defying it, a way of saying "Fuck you" to it: to Nazis, to pogroms, to the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, to ghettos, to forced conversions, to being barred from all professions except money-lending and then being vilified as money-grubbing usurers, to expulsions and massacres, to the blood libel, to the Spanish Inquisition. Secular Judaism isn't just about the fact that your great-grandmother practiced these rituals. It's about the fact that she was put in a concentration camp because of them.

So that's an important difference from Trekkies. But my basic premise still remains. Which is that secular Judaism is a way of preserving religious tradition, without needing to believe in God or the supernatural. Secular Judaism shows that you can take religious observances seriously, as a connection to family and history... without believing that you're doing it for God.

Judaism may not be alone in this, either. I'm beginning to hear of secular Catholics, too: Catholics who are following the "we think these rituals and images are beautiful, and they're an important part of our family history handed down through generations, but it's not like we actually believe it" pattern laid out by secular Judaism.

And, of course, there's one of the most classic forms of secularized religion: Christmas. Christmas is ostensibly a celebration of the birth of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ; but for many people, it's simply a celebration of the fact that the days are dark and cold, and we need to feast and light lights and give presents and generally schmooze with the people we care about. It's becoming a secular holiday for many, and hard-line atheists from PZ Myers to Richard Dawkins have spoken cheerfully in favor of it.

And you know what?

I love this.

I would love to see more of this. I would love to see a secular Catholicism that preserves the soothing ritual and rich pageantry, without the sex-hating dogma and the authoritarian hierarchy. I would love to see a secular Baptism that preserves the wild oratory and soaring music, without the hateful obsession with hellfire and judgment. I would love to see a secular Hinduism that preserves the magnificent imagery and generous diversity, without the rationalization for the caste system. I would love to see a secular Wicca that preserves the passionate love of nature, without the dismissive contempt for science that is so contradictory to that love. I would love to see a secular Methodism that preserves the Jello salad. (Actually, I could do fine without that... but if other people want to preserve the grand tradition of Methodist Jello salads, more power to them.)

I probably wouldn't practice any of this myself. My own familial religious tradition is "boring Middle-American Protestantism" from my grandparents (hence the Jello salads), agnosticism and atheism from my parents. The former isn't interesting enough for me to preserve (except for Christmas), and the latter I'm already running with. So no secular religion for me.

But I could totally see it. I could see it as a way for humanity to preserve the cool stuff about religion -- the ritual and the tradition, the narrative and the imagery, the community and the connection with family and history -- without the active disregard for reality that causes so much trouble.

And as an atheist, I could be totally happy with it.

So what's the difference?

What's the difference between this secular Trekkie Judaism that I respect, the secular Trekkie Catholicism that I'm encouraging... and the "Religion is a useful metaphor" trope that I've argued against so hotly?

The difference is this:

Progressive religion says, "This is simply a story"... but it isn't sincere. You can tell that it isn't sincere by how bent out of shape it gets when people point out that it's just a story, and therefore isn't really true. Progressive religion uses the "metaphor" trope as a slippery way of avoiding hard questions when engaged with skeptics... and as soon as the skeptics turn their backs, it slips right back into actual, non-metaphorical, "belief in immaterial entities or forces that it has no evidence for" religion. Progressive religion is ultimately just as willing to ignore evidence that contradicts its comforting story as hard-line conservative religion.

Truly secular "religion," on the other hand, says, "This is simply a story" -- and means it.

The difference is this:

If you say to a "Religion is a useful metaphor" believer, "Your religion is a story, it isn't factually true, a lot of the history is mangled and some of it's flatly wrong, and all the God stuff is totally made up"... chances are they're going to get seriously defensive. They'll tell you how intolerant you are, how you're just as dogmatic and proselytizing as religious fundamentalists, how disrespectful you are to point out the flaws in religion and try to persuade people that it's mistaken, how close-minded you are to reject ideas just because they're not supported by dumb old evidence.

If you say to a secular Jew -- a genuinely secular, non-believing, atheist Jew -- "Your religion is a story, it isn't factually true, a lot of the history is mangled and some of it's flatly wrong, and all the God stuff is totally made up"... they'll say, "Yeah, I know. So what? So are you coming to Passover or not?"

When I was a Psychology student, I had a lecturer who told stories of his own early life as a young clinical psychologist. One story he told was of a psychotic patient who was under his care. This man was quite normal in other ways, but he believed that he (the patient) was dead. So one day my lecturer decided to try some cognitive therapy on him:
Lecturer: You think you're dead, yes? Well, do dead people bleed?
Patient: No, of course not. How could they?
Lecturer: (Sticking a pin in him) Well, how about that?
Patient: Good God! That's amazing! I was totally wrong!... Dead people do bleed!
Anyone who has tried to have an argument with a religious believer about the many contradictions and errors in religious texts will find themselves in sympathy with my lecturer. Each logical step forward seems to be met with another piece of twisted logic or wilful blindness. Typical examples can be found in many places on the web: for instance, at the Secular Web site or Ebon Musings where intelligent and dedicated people have given up hours of their time trying to pin down religious believers on the many contradictions in the Bible, only to be met by increasingly convoluted and unlikely twists of logic and inference. I don't want to disparage these people in any way, but I hope they realise that they will never convince their opponents, and the only ones to benefit from a debate of this kind are the onlookers. If there are any examples of a biblical literalist being convinced to recant by argument, I'm not aware of them.
Why is this? Why is it so hard to pin someone down to an agreed interpretation of what a particular phrase or sentence means? If it's any consolation to atheists, the problem is not just theirs: it besets the whole history of Western philosophy. Dozens of philosophers have stated what they considered were clear and definite answers to philosophical problems, only to have the whole thing misunderstood -- as they saw it -- in many different ways by their readers.
The fact is -- as Wittgenstein finally pointed out about fifty years ago -- language is not intended for debates. For pre-Darwinian philosophers like Descartes, who believed that language was designed and delivered to humans by a divine power, this must have been almost impossible to understand. Only when we recognise that language is a human invention, designed for a specific purpose, can we see that there are some things which language just can't do.
Here's a simple example: imagine there are two types of fruit tree that grow on Mars. They look completely identical, but one smells of oranges and the fruit is instantly fatal: the other smells of lemons and the fruit is sweet and healthy. A party of starving explorers gets in touch with you by radio and asks for your help in determining which fruits they can eat. The only problem is that they grew up on Venus and have never smelt either an orange or a lemon before.
How could you possibly help them? Other than saying 'It smells like...', is there any other way you could use language to convey the difference between orange-smell and lemon-smell? You can recognise it in an instant, but can you say it? Could you confidently give the explorers the instructions that would save their lives? In general, language is very poor at describing smells because that capacity has never been needed. Apart from a few specialised areas like wine tasting and perfumery, there is just no need for ordinary people to describe smells to each other, and so language has never developed that capacity.
The same is true of exegetical debates. Nothing in the evolutionary development of the human race has made it crucial to be able to distinguish infallible knowledge from strong belief, or sense-data from sensations, so debates about terms like these are bound to be loaded with misunderstandings and misinterpretations. Even the most careful 'natural language' philosopher or theologian will eventually stray into using terms which are manufactured for the purpose, and thereby spawn a different interpretation in the mind of every different person who hears or reads them.
But even 'ordinary language' can pose the same problems. "I have a tree in my garden" sounds like a simple statement, for instance, but someone who wanted to interpret it in such a way as to dispute its literal truth could find lots of ways to do so:

• It's not YOUR garden, it belongs jointly to you and your spouse.
• It's only three metres tall: it's not a tree but a large shrub.
• It's a bonsai tree, not a real tree.
• It's not IN the garden, but on the boundary with your neighbour.
• It's a tree, but a cut-down dead one from Christmas.
• It's only a metaphorical 'tree'.
• It's a real tree, but only a metaphorical 'garden'.

And of course I could have meant any of these things, and without corroborating evidence there is no way for you or anyone else to know for sure what I did mean. But all the corroborating evidence will also take the form of assertions, and any of these can be disputed in the same way, and so on and so forth...
Multiply this by the number of assertions in a book like the Bible, for instance, and it will become obvious that people will be able to reach agreement about what something actually says only when they are motivated to do so. Since philosophers make progress by disagreeing, and religious believers gain status by sticking to their beliefs no matter what, any project which tries to force people against their will to agree on what a written text says is inevitably doomed to failure. That is just not what language is for.
So by all means engage believers in arguments about the literal truth of their holy books, but don't expect to win, or even to have them concede that you have scored a single point. Make sure there are plenty of onlookers with open minds and you may achieve something, but be prepared for intense frustration as your opponent limbers up for some bizarre mental gymnastics. What is bleeding obvious to you may be a microscopic quibble to them, and vice versa.

Gods that Christians don't believe in

Gods that atheists don't believe in

Alberich Ama-no-minaka-nushi Ama-tsu-mara Amaethon Amaterasu Amatsu Amatsu-kami Ame-no-mi-kumari Ame-no-wakahiko Amidaam-no-tanabata-hime An Anahita Anat Anath Andhrimnir Andraste Andvari Angrboda Angus og Ankt Annapurna Anouke Anshar Anu Aphrodite Apollo Apsu Apukohai Arawn Aray Ares Arianrhod Artemis Artio Asclepius Asherah Ashur Astarte Astrild Athena Athirat Athtart Atla Atlas Audhumla Ba'al hadad Baal Baal-hammon Baalat Babd catha Bacchus Badb Baku Balder Balor Balrama Bast Ba xian Beg-tse Bel Belatu-cadros Bellona Belobog Benten Benzai-ten Bergelmir Berstuk Bes Beyla Bhuvaneshwari Bimbogami Binzuru-sonja Bishamon Bixia yuanjin Blodeuwedd Borghild Bosatsu Bragi Brahma Bran Branwen Brighid Brigit Bris Brono Buddha Bugid y aiba Buluc chabtan Burijas Butsu Bylgia Camalus Camaxtli Camulus Cariocienus Caswallawn Ceres Ceridwen Cernunnos Cerridwen Cerunnos Chac Chalchiuhtlicue Charun Chemosh Cheng-huang Chien-shin Chimata-no-kami Chup-kamui Crnobog Cupid Cybele Cyhiraeth Dagda Dagon Dagon Dagur Daibosatsu Daikoku Dainichi Damkina Danu Davlin Dawn Dazbog Demeter Dev Dewi Dhanwantari Dhumavati Diana Diancecht Di cang Dionysus Disen Don Donar Dosojin Dozoku-shin Druantia Durga Dylan Dziewona Ea Ebisu Eir Ekchuah Ekibiogami El Elaine El elyon Elli Emma-o Enki Enlil Enyalius Enyo Eos Epona Ereskigal Erra Eshara Eshmun Farbauti Faunus Fenrir Flidais Flins Flora Forseti Freya Freyr Frigg Fudo Fujin Fukurokuju Funadama Futsu-nushi-no-kami Gaia Gama Ganesha Ganga Garuda Gauri Geb Gefion Gekka-o Geong si Gerd Giobhniu Gu Guan-di Gun Gwydion Gwynn ap nudd Hachiman Hades Hadur Hai Haniyasu-hiko Haniyasu-hime Hanuman Hathor Haulili Haya-ji Heimdall Hel Helios Heng-o Hephaestus Hera Hermes Hermod Hestia Hiaka Hiiakawawahilani Hinakuluiau Hiruko Hod Hoderi Holler Hoori Hors Horus Hoso-no-kami Hotei Hsi-wang-mu Huitzilopochtli Hygeia Ictinike Ida-ten Idun Ika-zuchi-no-kami Iki-ryo Inanna Inari Indra Inti Irmin Ishtar Isis Isora Ixtab Izanagi Izanaki Izanami Janus Jarilo Jarovit Jinushigami Jizo Jord Jormungand Juichimen Juno Jupiter Jurojin Juthrbog Juturna Kagutsuchi Kalaipahoa Kali Kaluannuunohonionio Kamado-gami Kamapua'a Kami-kaze Kaminari Kamohoali'i Kamooalii Kanaloa Kanayama-hiko Kanayama-hime Kane Kane-hekili Kapo Kapohoikahiola Karewit Kari Kartikeya Karttikeya Kathirat Kaupe Kawa-no-kami Kenro-ji-jin Keoahikamakaua Keuakepo Khepri Ki Kiha Kingu Kinich ahau Kishar Kishi-bojin Kishijoten Kishimo-jin Ko-no-hana Kojin Koleamoku Korrawi Koshin Kothar Koya-no-myoin Krishna Ku Kuahana Kukailimoku Kukaoo Kukulcan Kukunochi-no-kami Kuni-toko-tachi Kura-okami Kurma Kuula Kvasir Laamaomao Labraid Lada Lado Laga Laka Lakakane Lakshmi Laran Lares Libintia Lie Liza Llyr Lofn Loki Lono Lonomakua Lotan Lugh Luna Macha Maeve Magna mater Magni Mahulu Maia Manannan Mani Manua Marduk Margawse Marisha-ten Marowit Mars Maru Marzanna Matangi Math ap mathowny Matka gabia Matka ziemia Maui Mawaya-no-kami Maya Mebd Medb Melqart Menhit Menthu Mentu Mercury Mextli Mider Mikaboshi Milu Miming Mimir Minerva Miro Mithras Mixcoatl Miyazu-hime Moaalii Modi Mokosh Mokualii Moloch Monju-bosatsu Mooaleo Morrigan Mot Mummu Murukan Musubi-no-kami Myrrdin Nacon Nai-no-kami Naka-yama-tsu-mi Nammu Nanaja Nanna Nanse Neith Nemain Nemesis Nephthys Neptune Nergal Niamh Nikko-bosatsu Ninazu Ninhurzag Ninigi-no-mikoto Nintu Ninurta Njord Nominosukune Norns Nott Nut Nyorai Oanomochi Odin Ogoun Ohkuninushi Oho-yama Ohonamochi Ohyamatsumi Okuni-nushi Ops Orgelmir Oro Osiris Ostara Ouli Owatatsumi Oyamatsumi Pales Pan Papa Parvati Pele Perperuna Persephone Perun Phaethon Phoebe Phoebus apollo Pilumnus Pluto Podaga Poliahu Pomona Porewit Poseidon Proserpine Puea Qadeshtu Quetzalcoatl Radegast Raiden Ram Rama Ran Re Resef Reshep Resheph Rhea Rod Rugiviet Ryo-wo Sabazius Sae-no-kami Saga Sakhmet Sambo-kojin Samulayo Sarasvati Sarutahiko ohkami Saturn Segomo Selene Sengen Septu Seshat Seth Seti Shachar Shaka Shakti Shalim Shamash Shamayim Shapsu Shemesh Shen yi Shichi fujukin Shinda Shine-tsu-hiko Shiva Shoden Shoki Shu Si-wang-mu Siebog Sif Simargl Sin Sirona Sita Siwa Sjofn Skadi Sleipnir Sol Stribog Suijin Suitengu Sukuna-biko Surya Susanoh Susanowa Svantetit Svarog Svetovid Svetovit Syn Takami-musubi Takemikadzuchi Taki-tsu-hiko Tatsuta-hime Tawaret Tefnut Tehwom Tenjin Teutates Tezcatlipoca Thanatos The zorya Thor Tiamat Tlaloc Tonatiuh Toyo-uke-bime Toyouke-omikami Triglav Tsuki-yumi Tu Tu matauenga Turris Tyche Tyr Uba Uga-jin Uga-no-mitama Ukanipo Ukemochi Ulaulekeahi Uli Ull Utu Uzume Vali Valkyries Vamana Vanir Var Veles Venus Vertumnus Vesta Vidar Vishnu Volturnus Vulcan Wakahiru-me Wata-tsu-mi Wepwawet Wurukatte Xipe Xi wang-mu Xochipilli Xochiquetzal Yabune Yam Yam-nahar Yama-no-kami Yamato Yarikh Ymir Yu-huang Yuki-onna Yum kimil Zababa Zana Zedek Zeus Zirnitra Zislbog Zizilia Zroya

Alberich Ama-no-minaka-nushi Ama-tsu-mara Amaethon Amaterasu Amatsu Amatsu-kami Ame-no-mi-kumari Ame-no-wakahiko Amidaam-no-tanabata-hime An Anahita Anat Anath Andhrimnir Andraste Andvari Angrboda Angus og Ankt Annapurna Anouke Anshar Anu Aphrodite Apollo Apsu Apukohai Arawn Aray Ares Arianrhod Artemis Artio Asclepius Asherah Ashur Astarte Astrild Athena Athirat Athtart Atla Atlas Audhumla Ba'al hadad Baal Baal-hammon Baalat Babd catha Bacchus Badb Baku Balder Balor Balrama Bast Ba xian Beg-tse Bel Belatu-cadros Bellona Belobog Benten Benzai-ten Bergelmir Berstuk Bes Beyla Bhuvaneshwari Bimbogami Binzuru-sonja Bishamon Bixia yuanjin Blodeuwedd Borghild Bosatsu Bragi Brahma Bran Branwen Brighid Brigit Bris Brono Buddha Bugid y aiba Buluc chabtan Burijas Butsu Bylgia Camalus Camaxtli Camulus Cariocienus Caswallawn Ceres Ceridwen Cernunnos Cerridwen Cerunnos Chac Chalchiuhtlicue Charun Chemosh Cheng-huang Chien-shin Chimata-no-kami Chup-kamui Crnobog Cupid Cybele Cyhiraeth Dagda Dagon Dagon Dagur Daibosatsu Daikoku Dainichi Damkina Danu Davlin Dawn Dazbog Demeter Dev Dewi Dhanwantari Dhumavati Diana Diancecht Di cang Dionysus Disen Don Donar Dosojin Dozoku-shin Druantia Durga Dylan Dziewona Ea Ebisu Eir Ekchuah Ekibiogami El Elaine El elyon Elli Emma-o Enki Enlil Enyalius Enyo Eos Epona Ereskigal Erra Eshara Eshmun Farbauti Faunus Fenrir Flidais Flins Flora Forseti Freya Freyr Frigg Fudo Fujin Fukurokuju Funadama Futsu-nushi-no-kami Gaia Gama Ganesha Ganga Garuda Gauri Geb Gefion Gekka-o Geong si Gerd Giobhniu Gu Guan-di Gun Gwydion Gwynn ap nudd Hachiman Hades Hadur Hai Haniyasu-hiko Haniyasu-hime Hanuman Hathor Haulili Haya-ji Heimdall Hel Helios Heng-o Hephaestus Hera Hermes Hermod Hestia Hiaka Hiiakawawahilani Hinakuluiau Hiruko Hod Hoderi Holler Hoori Hors Horus Hoso-no-kami Hotei Hsi-wang-mu Huitzilopochtli Hygeia Ictinike Ida-ten Idun Ika-zuchi-no-kami Iki-ryo Inanna Inari Indra Inti Irmin Ishtar Isis Isora Ixtab Izanagi Izanaki Izanami Janus Jarilo Jarovit Jinushigami Jizo Jord Jormungand Juichimen Juno Jupiter Jurojin Juthrbog Juturna Kagutsuchi Kalaipahoa Kali Kaluannuunohonionio Kamado-gami Kamapua'a Kami-kaze Kaminari Kamohoali'i Kamooalii Kanaloa Kanayama-hiko Kanayama-hime Kane Kane-hekili Kapo Kapohoikahiola Karewit Kari Kartikeya Karttikeya Kathirat Kaupe Kawa-no-kami Kenro-ji-jin Keoahikamakaua Keuakepo Khepri Ki Kiha Kingu Kinich ahau Kishar Kishi-bojin Kishijoten Kishimo-jin Ko-no-hana Kojin Koleamoku Korrawi Koshin Kothar Koya-no-myoin Krishna Ku Kuahana Kukailimoku Kukaoo Kukulcan Kukunochi-no-kami Kuni-toko-tachi Kura-okami Kurma Kuula Kvasir Laamaomao Labraid Lada Lado Laga Laka Lakakane Lakshmi Laran Lares Libintia Lie Liza Llyr Lofn Loki Lono Lonomakua Lotan Lugh Luna Macha Maeve Magna mater Magni Mahulu Maia Manannan Mani Manua Marduk Margawse Marisha-ten Marowit Mars Maru Marzanna Matangi Math ap mathowny Matka gabia Matka ziemia Maui Mawaya-no-kami Maya Mebd Medb Melqart Menhit Menthu Mentu Mercury Mextli Mider Mikaboshi Milu Miming Mimir Minerva Miro Mithras Mixcoatl Miyazu-hime Moaalii Modi Mokosh Mokualii Moloch Monju-bosatsu Mooaleo Morrigan Mot Mummu Murukan Musubi-no-kami Myrrdin Nacon Nai-no-kami Naka-yama-tsu-mi Nammu Nanaja Nanna Nanse Neith Nemain Nemesis Nephthys Neptune Nergal Niamh Nikko-bosatsu Ninazu Ninhurzag Ninigi-no-mikoto Nintu Ninurta Njord Nominosukune Norns Nott Nut Nyorai Oanomochi Odin Ogoun Ohkuninushi Oho-yama Ohonamochi Ohyamatsumi Okuni-nushi Ops Orgelmir Oro Osiris Ostara Ouli Owatatsumi Oyamatsumi Pales Pan Papa Parvati Pele Perperuna Persephone Perun Phaethon Phoebe Phoebus apollo Pilumnus Pluto Podaga Poliahu Pomona Porewit Poseidon Proserpine Puea Qadeshtu Quetzalcoatl Radegast Raiden Ram Rama Ran Re Resef Reshep Resheph Rhea Rod Rugiviet Ryo-wo Sabazius Sae-no-kami Saga Sakhmet Sambo-kojin Samulayo Sarasvati Sarutahiko ohkami Saturn Segomo Selene Sengen Septu Seshat Seth Seti Shachar Shaka Shakti Shalim Shamash Shamayim Shapsu Shemesh Shen yi Shichi fujukin Shinda Shine-tsu-hiko Shiva Shoden Shoki Shu Si-wang-mu Siebog Sif Simargl Sin Sirona Sita Siwa Sjofn Skadi Sleipnir Sol Stribog Suijin Suitengu Sukuna-biko Surya Susanoh Susanowa Svantetit Svarog Svetovid Svetovit Syn Takami-musubi Takemikadzuchi Taki-tsu-hiko Tatsuta-hime Tawaret Tefnut Tehwom Tenjin Teutates Tezcatlipoca Thanatos The zorya Thor Tiamat Tlaloc Tonatiuh Toyo-uke-bime Toyouke-omikami Triglav Tsuki-yumi Tu Tu matauenga Turris Tyche Tyr Uba Uga-jin Uga-no-mitama Ukanipo Ukemochi Ulaulekeahi Uli Ull Utu Uzume Vali Valkyries Vamana Vanir Var Veles Venus Vertumnus Vesta Vidar Vishnu Volturnus Vulcan Wakahiru-me Wata-tsu-mi Wepwawet Wurukatte Xipe Xi wang-mu Xochipilli Xochiquetzal Yabune Yam Yam-nahar Yama-no-kami Yamato Yarikh Ymir Yu-huang Yuki-onna Yum kimil Zababa Zana Zedek Zeus Zirnitra Zislbog Zizilia Zroya Yahweh

(adapted from a forum on the Internet Infidels)
TRANSCENDENTAL ARGUMENT
(1) God exists.
(2) If God exists, then if reason exists then God exists.
(3) Reason exists.
(4) Therefore, God exists.
COSMOLOGICAL ARGUMENT
(1) If I say something must have a cause, it has a cause.
(2) I say the universe must have a cause.
(3) Therefore, the universe has a cause.
(4) Therefore, God exists.
ONTOLOGICAL ARGUMENT (I)
(1) I define God to be X.
(2) Since I can conceive of X, X must exist.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ONTOLOGICAL ARGUMENT (II)
(1) I can conceive of a perfect God.
(2) One of the qualities of perfection is existence.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
MODAL ONTOLOGICAL ARGUMENT
(1) God exists.
(2) God, existing, is either necessary or unnecessary.
(3) God is not unnecessary, therefore God must be necessary.
(4) Therefore, God exists.
TELEOLOGICAL ARGUMENT
(1) Check out the world/universe/giraffe. Isn't it complex?
(2) Only God could have made them so complex.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM BEAUTY (aka TELEOLOGICAL ARGUMENT II)
(1) Isn't that baby/sunset/flower/tree beautiful?
(2) Only God could have made them so beautiful.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM MIRACLES
(1) My aunt had cancer.
(2) The doctors gave her all these horrible treatments.
(3) My aunt prayed to God and now she doesn't have cancer.
(4) Therefore, God exists.
MORAL ARGUMENT (I)
(1) Person X, a well-known atheist, was morally inferior to the rest of us.
(2) Therefore, God exists.
MORAL ARGUMENT (II)
(1) In my younger days I was a cursing, drinking, smoking, gambling, child-molesting, thieving, murdering, bed-wetting bastard.
(2) That all changed once I became religious.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM CREATION
(1) If evolution is false, then creationism is true, and therefore God exists.
(2) Evolution can't be true, since I lack the mental capacity to understand it; moreover, to accept its truth would cause me to be uncomfortable
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM FEAR
(1) If there is no God then we're all going to die.
(2) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM THE BIBLE
(1) [arbitrary passage from OT]
(2) [arbitrary passage from NT]
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM INTELLIGENCE
(1) Look, there's really no point in me trying to explain the whole thing to you stupid atheists -- it's too complicated for you to understand. God exists whether you like it or not.
(2) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM UNINTELLIGENCE
(1) Okay, I don't pretend to be as intelligent as you guys -- you're obviously very well read. But I read the Bible, and nothing you say can convince me that God does not exist. I feel him in my heart, and you can feel him too, if you'll just ask him into your life. "For God so loved the world that he sent his only begotten son into the world, that whosoever believes in him shall not perish from the earth" John 3:16.
(2) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM BELIEF
(1) If God exists, then I should believe in Him.
(2) I believe in God.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM INTIMIDATION
(1) See this bonfire?
(2) Therefore, God exists.
PARENTAL ARGUMENT
(1) My mommy and daddy told me that God exists.
(2) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM NUMBERS
(1) Millions and millions of people believe in God.
(2) They can't all be wrong, can they?
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM ABSURDITY
(1) Maranathra!
(2) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM ECONOMY
(1) God exists, you bastards!
(2) Therefore, God exists.
BOATWRIGHT'S ARGUMENT
(1) Ha ha ha.
(2) Therefore, God exists.
DORE'S ARGUMENT
(1) I forgot to take my meds.
(2) Therefore, I AM CHRIST!!
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM GUITAR MASTERY
(1) Eric Clapton is God.
(2) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM INTERNET AUTHORITY
(1) There is a website that successfully argues for the existence of God.
(2) Here is the URL.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM INCOMPREHENSIBILITY
(1) Flabble glurk zoom boink blubba snurgleschnortz ping!
(2) No one has ever refuted (1).
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM AMERICAN EVANGELISM
(1) Telling people that God exists makes me filthy rich.
(2) Therefore, God exists.
MITCHELL'S ARGUMENT
(1) The Christian God exists.
(2) Therefore, all worldviews which don't assume the Christian God's existence are false and incomprehensible.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM BLINDNESS (I)
(1) Atheists are spiritually blind.
(2) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM BLINDNESS (II)
(1) God is love.
(2) Love is blind.
(3) Ray Charles is blind.
(4) Therefore, Ray Charles is God.
(5) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM FALLIBILITY
(1) Human reasoning is inherently flawed.
(2) Therefore, there is no reasonable way to challenge a proposition.
(3) I propose that God exists.
(4) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM SMUGNESS
(1) God exists.
(2) I don't give a crap whether you believe it or not; I have better things to do than to try to convince you morons.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM META-SMUGNESS
(1) Fuck you.
(2) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM MANIFESTATIONS
(1) If you turn your head sideways and squint a little, you can see an image of a bearded face in that tortilla.
(2) Therefore, God exists.
SLATHER'S ARGUMENT
(1) My toaster is God.
(2) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM INCOMPLETE DEVASTATION
(1) A plane crashed killing 143 passengers and crew.
(2) But one child survived with only third-degree burns.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM POSSIBLE WORLDS
(1) If things had been different, then things would be different.
(2) That would be bad.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM SHEER WILL
(1) I DO believe in God! I DO believe in God! I do I do I do I DO believe in God!
(2) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM NONBELIEF
(1) The majority of the world's population are nonbelievers in Christianity.
(2) This is just what Satan intended.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM POST-DEATH EXPERIENCE
(1) Person X died an atheist.
(2) He now realizes his mistake.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM EMOTIONAL BLACKMAIL
(1) God loves you.
(2) How could you be so heartless to not believe in him?
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM INCOHERENT BABBLE
(1) See that person spazzing on the church floor babbling incoherently?
(2) That's how infinite wisdom reveals itself.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
OPRAH'S ARGUMENT (I)
(1) The human spirit exists.
(2) Therefore, God exists.
OPRAH'S ARGUMENT (II)
(1) Check out this video segment.
(2) Now how can anyone watch that and NOT believe in God?
(3) Therefore, God exists.
CALVINISTIC ARGUMENT
(1) If God exists, then he will let me watch you be tortured forever.
(2) I rather like that idea.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM CROCKERY
(1) Pots don't go around giving orders to the potter.
(2) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM MASS PRODUCTION
(1) Barbie dolls were created.
(2) If Barbie dolls were created, then so were trees.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM PAROCHIALISM
(1) God is everywhere.
(2) We haven't been everywhere to prove he's not there.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM UPPERCASE ASSERTION
(1) GOD EXISTS! GET USED TO IT!
(2) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM INFINITE REGRESS
(1) Ask atheists what caused the Big Bang.
(2) Regardless of their answer, ask how they know this.
(3) Continue process until the atheist admits he doesn't know the answer to one of your questions.
(4) You win!
(5) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM INCREDULITY
(1) How could God NOT exist, you bozo?
(2) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM HISTORY
(1) The Bible is true.
(2) Therefore, the Bible is historical fact.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM RESURRECTION
(1) Proof of God's existence will be available when you rise bodily from your grave.
(2) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM BIOGENESIS
(1) Where did Adam come from, dummy?
(2) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM STEADFAST FAITH
(1) A lot of really cool people believed in God their entire lives.
(2) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM LONELINESS
(1) Christians say that Jesus is their best friend.
(2) I'm lonely, and I want a best friend.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM ARGUMENTATION
(1) God exists.
(2) [atheist's counterargument]
(3) Yes he does.
(4) [atheist's counterargument]
(5) Yes he does!
(6) [atheist's counterargument]
(7) YES HE DOES!!!
(8) [atheist gives up and goes home]
(9) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM CREATIVE INTERPRETATION
(1) God is
(a) The feeling you have when you look at a newborn baby.
(b) The love of a mother for her child.
(c) That little still voice in your heart.
(d) Humankind's potential to overcome their difficulties.
(e) How I feel when I look at a sunset.
(f) The taste of ice cream on a hot day.
(2) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM INSECURITY
(1) We have gone to absolutely berserk lengths to establish that atheists are laughable morons.
(1.5) Actually, we did so in the hopes of curing our own insecurities about theism -- but there's no chance in hell we'll ever admit that.
(2) Therefore, atheists are laughable morons.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM SUPERIORITY
(1) If God does not exist, then I am an inferior being, since I am not "special" in a cosmic sense.
(2) But I am superior. Because I am a Christian.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM PERFECTION
(1) If there are absolute moral standards, then God exists.
(2) Atheists say that there are no absolute moral standards.
(3) But that's because they don't want to admit to being sinners.
(4) Therefore, there are absolute moral standards.
(5) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM HUMAN NECESSITY
(1) Atheists say that they don't need God.
(2) Which just goes to show that they need God.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM HIDDEN LOGIC (I)
(1) Intellectually, I know that the existence of God is impossible, or vastly improbable.
(2) But I must put on the appearance of being cool and intellectual in front of my Christian apologist peers.
(3) Therefore, I must pretend that (1) is false.
(4) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM INDULGENCE
(1) Atheists like to think that they can control their emotional desires.
(2) But they're atheists, so they can't.
(3) Therefore, atheists feel the need to indulge in whatever they feel like without worrying about committing sin.
(4) This just goes to show how they need God in their lives.
(5) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM HATE
(1) Some atheists hate Christians and Christianity.
(2) That's why they don't believe in God.
(3) Pathetic, aren't they?
(4) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM QUENTIN SMITH
(1) Quentin Smith says that God does not exist.
(2) But God does exist.
(3) Therefore, Quentin Smith cannot be accepted as an expert on the matter, because he is wrong.
(4) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM EVIL SPIRITS
(1) I've just had contact with evil spirits.
(2) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM HIDDEN LOGIC (II)
(1) Atheists say that God doesn't exist.
(2) But they only say that because they want to look cool and intellectual in front of their peers.
(3) They don't fool me!
(4) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM HOVIND'S CHALLENGE
(1) Kent Hovind offers $250,000 (which may or may not exist) to anyone who can demonstrate evolution (defined as a natural, acausal origin of the universe) to a reasonable doubt (meaning with 100% certainty, allowing for no other possibilities whatsoever) in front of a neutral committee (handpicked by Hovind himself) and according to certain criteria (carefully worded so as to rule out any possibility whatsoever of the challenge ever being met).
(2) No atheist has ever met this challenge.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM INSANITY
(1) No sane person could have thought up Christianity
(2) Therefore, it must be true
(3) Therefore, God exists
ARGUMENT FROM EXHAUSTION (abridged)
(1) Do you agree with the utterly trivial proposition X?
(2) Atheist: of course.
(3) How about the slightly modified proposition X'?
(4) Atheist: Um, no, not really.
(5) Good. Since we agree, how about Y? Is that true?
(6) Atheist: No! And I didn't agree with X'!
(7) With the truths of these clearly established, surely you agree that Z is true as well?
(8) Atheist: No. So far I have only agreed with X! Where is this going, anyway?
(9) I'm glad we all agree.....
....
(37) So now we have used propositions X, X', Y, Y', Z, Z', P, P', Q and Q' to arrive at the obviously valid point R. Agreed?
(38) Atheist: Like I said, so far I've only agreed with X. Where is this going?
....
(81) So we now conclude from this that propositions L'', L''' and J'' are true. Agreed?
(82) I HAVEN'T AGREED WITH ANYTHING YOU'VE SAID SINCE X! WHERE IS THIS GOING!?
....
(177) ...and it follows that proposition HRV, SHQ'' and BTU' are all obviously valid. Agreed?
(178) [Atheist either faints from overwork or leaves in disgust]
(179) Therefore, God exists.
MR. GOODSALT'S ARGUMENT (ARGUMENT FROM GENERAL INQUIRY)
(1) Question for atheist population: [apparently random question]
(2) Your answer is wrong.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
PEACOCK ARGUMENT FROM ORIGINALITY
(1) I have written the following to demonstrate the existence of God.
(2) [insert entire text of a William Lane Craig article]
(3) Therefore, God exists.
PEACOCK ARGUMENT FROM LIMITED VOCABULARY
(1) You use lots of big words.
(2) Therefore, I cannot possibly be expected to understand your refutation of my position.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
PEACOCK ARGUMENT FROM SELECTIVE MEMORY
(1) [Christian asks "stumper" question]
(2) [Atheist answers question]
(3) [A lapse of time]
(4) [Christian repeats question]
(5) [Atheist repeats answer]
(6) [A lapse of time]
(7) [Christian repeats question]
(8) [Atheist repeats answer]
(9) [A lapse of time]
(10) Atheist, you never answered my question.
(11) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM DIVINE ECONOMICS
(1) Protestant Christian nations are rich.
(2) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM PERSONAL SANITY
(1) I've had religious experiences that can't be explained unless I'm insane or God exists.
(2) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM INSTITUTIONAL LONGETIVITY
(1) The Roman Catholic Church has been around for a long time.
(2) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM INEVITABILITY
(1) I have proof that God exists.
(2) I won't bother to tell you what it is because, being atheists, you would be hostile to the conclusion anyway.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM "THE MATRIX"
(1) We cannot prove that we don't live in a Matrix-like world.
(2) Therefore we cannot know reality.
(3) If reality is contingent, then everything is possible.
(4) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM SUBJECTIVITY
(1) Everything is subjective.
(2) No subjective proof can be superior to any other subjective proof.
(3) Based upon my subjective opinion, your opinion, that if everything is subjective then, perforce, God is subjective, is false.
(4) Therefore, God (objectively) exists.
ARGUMENT FROM POSTMODERNISM
(1) I'm going to prove to you that God exists.
(2) [insert any of the other arguments on this page in here]
(3) [atheist refutes argument]
(4) I cannot prove there is a God anymore than anyone of us can prove we really exist in a tangible world.
(5) Therefore, God exists.
Meta-Proof
(1) This is a proof of God's existence.
(2) If the reader finishes reading this proof, the existence of God will be proven to him/her.
(3) If the existence of God is proven, then God exists.
(4) Therefore, God exists.
Proof By Anecdote
(1) God can be seen by those who believe in Him.
(2) If the God is seen, then He must exist.
(3) I have seen God.
(4) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM BIBLICAL HISTORY
(1) Many modern historians think that there probably was somebody named Jesus, maybe.
(2) Therefore, God exists.
BENDER’S ARGUMENT(II)
(1) One day, demons were tap-dancing on my roof. I prayed and they went away.
(2) Therefore, demons are really good dancers.
(3) Also, God exists.
RANDMAN’S ARGUMENT
(1) This entry from the 1975 World Book Encyclopedia on evolution contains some errors that I claim to have already substantiated.
(2) Mr. Ph.D.-in-Evolutionary-Biology, this proves that evolution is an unsound scientific concept.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM MULTIPLICITY (aka Metacrock's Argument)
(1) I have a large number of arguments for God.
(2) One of them is probably true.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM FORTUITOUS COINCIDENCE
(1) What are the odds of that happening?
(2) Pretty long, I’ll bet.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
BENDER’S ARGUMENT III (ARGUMENT FROM DAVID BLAINE)
(1) If David Blaine does real magic, then God exists.
(2) It looked real on his TV special.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM MYSTERIOUS USE OF PREPOSITIONS
(1) It is impossible to disprove God with your puny human intellect unless you are above God.
(2) Are you higher than God?
(3) I’ll take that puzzled look on your face as a no.
(4) Therefore, God (being the highest thing ever) exists.
ARGUMENT FROM TEEN CHRISTIAN MOVEMENT
(1) God is so totally awesome, dude, and if you would pretend that Creed and POD were good bands, you would realize that.
(2) Also, our Youth Group leader Skip once, like, cured a broken leg using only the power of the almighty Lord.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM SPEAKING IN TOUNGES
(1) My friend here, once started spontaneously speaking some jibberish that sounded to me kind of like Russian.
(2) But neither he nor I know anything about Russian.
(3) The only explanation is God.
(4) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM EUROPEAN HISTORY
(1) Many prominent thinkers in pre-modern Europe believed in God.
(2) Let’s just forget about the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM DESIGN
(1) If there is a designer, then God must exist.
(2) If I find a watch in a forest, there must be a designer.
(3) *throws watch into forest*
(4) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM OFFENSE
(1) God exists.
(atheist makes counterarguments)
(2) You know what? I am offended.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM PRAYER
(1) God exists.
(atheist makes counterarguments)
(2) You have my prayers.
ARGUMENT FROM AGNOSTICISM
(1) I don't know and you don't know either.
(2) Therefore, God exists
ARGUMENT FROM LOVE
(1) Have you ever fallen in love?
(of course!!)
(2) So what is the cause of love? Isn't it God? Am I right or not?
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM IDENTITY (PC argument)
(1) Believing in God is a central part of my identity.
(2) You don't mean to deny my identity do you?
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM FORMATTING
(1) Behold, foolish atheists, I present you with an incontrovertible proof of the existence of God.
(2) [Christian posts 10,000 word document without a single paragraph break]
(3) [Atheists’ eyes implode]
(4) I see that nobody can refute (2).
(5) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM NON-CONFRONTATION
(1) I am not here to argue with you atheists.
(2) But come on, God obviously exists.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM EXODUS
(1) If the Exodus story has any basis in historical fact, then God exists.
(2) Some guy found some chariot wheels at the bottom of the Red Sea.
(3) There is absolutely no other way that chariots could get to the bottom of the Red Sea.
(4) This means the Exodus story is true.
(5) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM MARTYRDOM
(1) The apostles would not have died for something they knew wasn't true.
(2) Atheist gives examples of martyrs outside Christendom.
(3) Obviously those examples were fooled by Satan.
(4) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM TINKERBELL
(1) I really want God to be real.
(2) If you wish for something really hard, it'll come true.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM LACK OF DISPROOF
(1) You can't prove God doesn't exist!
(2) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM ANECDOTAL EXPERIENCE (I)
(1) I once experienced something I can't explain.
(2) Atheists offer several possible, natural explanations.
(3) You're just guessing! I was there.
(4) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM ANECDOTAL EXPERIENCE (II)
(1) I have experienced feelings of God's presence in my mind.
(2) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM NEUROSCIENCE
(1) Scientists say a portion of our brain may be responsible for mystical experiences.
(2) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM LACK OF EYEWITNESS (I)
(1) You weren't there to witness abiogenisis/big bang/etc.
(2) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM EYEWITNESS (sometimes follows or combined with Lack of Eyewitness I)
(1) Someone wrote the creation story in the bible.
(2) That someone must have been an eyewitness to the described events.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM LACK OF EYEWITNESS (II)
(1) No one's ever seen one species turn into another.
(2) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM HALF A WING
(1) Half of a wing is useless!
(2) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM PREFERRED ANCESTRY
(1) I don't want to be related to monkeys.
(2) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM FOOLISHNESS
(1) The bible says atheists are fools.
(2) I don't want to be a fool.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM PIG'S TEETH
(1) Some scientists once thought a tooth was from an "ape-man."
(2) Later scientists discovered it was a pig's tooth.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM PERSECUTION
(1) Someone made fun of my faith.
(2) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM JESUS SAID STUFF
(1) Jesus said some really cool stuff.
(2) No one else had said that stuff.
(2) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM DIFFERENCES
(1) The Christian God is different than the gods of other religions.
(2) Therefore, the Christian God exists.
THE ARGUMENT FROM CHRISTIAN MORALITY (although it could probably be adapted to just about any religion)
(1) Somewhere, someone who called himself or herself a Christian did something nice.
(2) This person was probably not lying.
(3) Therefore, this person was a Christian.
(4) Therefore, Christians do nice things.
(5) Therefore, Christians are moral.
(6) Christians believe in the Bible.
(7) Therefore, the Bible is moral.
(8) The Bible is God's word. It says so.
(9) Therefore, God is moral.
(10) (We are just ignoring all the not-nice things that Christians may or may not have done in the past, it's hard to trust history anyway, there are enemies of God working everywhere).
(11) A moral God would be really nice.
(12) Therefore, God exists.
THE ARGUMENT FROM CRAZINESS, aka PERCHANCE'S SISTER'S ARGUMENT
(1) I would go crazy if I didn't believe in God.
(2) I am not crazy.
(3) Therefore, God exists
ARGUMENT FROM CHOCOLATE (aka Mrs. Pope's proof)
(1) Chocolate is God's gift to humanity.
(2) Therefore, God exists.
Now class, would anyone like to attempt an Argument From Beer?
ARGUMENT FROM PERSECUTION(II)
(1) Jesus said that people would make fun of Christians.
(2) I am an idiot.
(3) People often point that out.
(4) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM WWJD
(1) I have the “What Would Jesus Do?” T-shirt, bracelet, baseball hat, and shoelaces.
(2) I wear them in public.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM PERSECUTION(III)
(1) You atheists are mean!
(2) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM INTEREST
(1) If God really doesn’t exist than atheists wouldn’t spend so much time talking about him.
(2) [Atheist refutes (1)]
(3) Therefore, God exists.
REID’S ARGUMENT
(1) You assume that your senses are reliable even though you can’t prove it.
(2) That means I get to assume anything I want.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM INTELLECTUAL SUPERIORITY
(1) [Christian posts argument]
(2) [Atheist refutes argument]
(3) Atheist, you obviously didn’t understand my argument.
(4) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM CATCH-PHRASE
(1) There are no atheists in foxholes.
(2) [Atheist points out atheists in foxholes]
(3) They don’t count.
(4) Therefore, God exists.
TERCEL’S ARGUMENT (ARGUMENT FROM PROBABILITY)
(1) We should believe what probably is true.
(2) I have arbitrarily assigned the proposition “God exists” a probability of 0.75.
(3) That probability came from my ass, which I know assigns extremely accurate probabilities to propositions concerning the existence of God.
(4) So God probably exists.
(5) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM FREE GIFT (aka Kissing Hank's ass)
(1) If some guy came up to you on the street and offered you a billion dollars for nothing in return, would you take the money or deny his existence?
(2) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM CHARITY
(1) Atheists don’t build hospitals.
(2) [Atheist points out Bill Gates and Ted Turner, who donate millions of dollars to charity]
(3) Yes, but do they build hospitals?
(4) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM SERIOUS ASSERTION
(1) God exists.
(2) No, seriously.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM POSITIVE OUTCOME
(1) Even if God doesn’t exist, it would be better if people believed He did.
(2) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM LACK OF EVIDENCE
(1) I believe that if God exists, there will be no evidence for his existence
(2) There is no evidence for the existence of God.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM LACK OF EVIDENCE II (MODIFIED SIMPSON’S ARGUMENT)
(1) God, if you exist, please give me absolutely no sign.
(2)
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM IDIOCY
(1) I am an idiot.
(2) Even an idiot can see that God exists.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM TERRORISM (I)
(1) Terrorists destroyed the WTC, killing thousands.
(2) One piece of the rubble sort of looks like a cross.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM TERRORISM (II)
(1) A plane was hijacked by terrorists.
(2) The passengers prayed and attacked the terrorists.
(3) The plane crashed into a field, killing all aboard.
(4) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM TERRORISM III, aka PERCHANCE'S SISTER'S ARGUMENT II
(1) September 11th was really, really bad.
(2) We have bad things happen to us when we're doing something bad.
(3) Therefore, September 11th was a punishment for something we did.
(4) Maybe it was being arrogant?
(5) Yeah, that's it!
(6) God let September 11th happen to teach America humility.
(7) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM MASS MURDER
(1) Stalin was an atheist.
(2) He murdered millions of people.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM TORNADOS
(1) A large tornado hit Kansas City.
(2) The tornado missed a church but destroyed several hundred homes.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM SPAGHETTI
(1) A few people saw something weird in a bowl of spaghetti.
(2) Some Catholics believe that it is the Virgin Mary.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM MONEY
(1) All U.S. currency contains the motto "In God We Trust."
(2) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
(1) The Pledge clearly states that America is "one nation, under God * * *."
(2) The existence of God is thus a necessary condition for the existence of America.
(3) America exists.
(4) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM THE FOUNDING FATHERS
(1) Some of America's Founding Fathers wrote favorably about the Bible.
(2) The Founding Fathers were really, really smart.
(3) Accordingly, the Bible must be true.
(4) The Bible says that God exists.
(5) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM THE FOUNDING FATHERS II
(1) The Declaration of Independence includes the words "God" and "Creator".
(2) Only a Christian would include the words "God" and "Creator"!
(3) Therefore this is a Christian Nation.
(4) A Christian Nation couldn't last over 200 years without God's help.
(5) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM THE FALL OF PAGAN ROME
(1) When Jesus was crucified, the Roman Empire was pagan, ruled by a pagan Emperor.
(2) A couple of hundred years later, lots of Romans were Christians, and the Emperor was a Christian too!
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM LOTS OF BOOKS
(1) The bible has lots of books written by lots of authors over a long period of time.
(2) Through centuries of vigorous apologetics we've been able to forge a more or less coherent plot for the whole bible.
(3) It is beyond human ability for so many authors over so long a time to write so many books from which we could hammer such a plot.
(4) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM UNLIKE OTHER RELIGIONS (I) (argument from sacrifice)
(1) The bible said Jesus died for our sins.
(2) No other religious text describes a god that died for our sins!
(3) Therefore, the Christian God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM UNLIKE OTHER RELIGIONS (II) (argument from resurrection)
(1) The bible said Jesus rose from the dead.
(2) No other religious text describes a god that rose from the dead!
(3) Therefore, the Christian God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM BRUTE FORCE
(1) [Christian tears Darwin Fish off car, breaks it in thirds, sticks it to driver's side window.]
(2) Therefore, the theory of evolution is wrong.
(3) Therefore, creationism is right.
(4) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM TROY
(1) There is little archeological evidence for the events in Exodus.
(2) But look at Troy! It is discovered when people thought the Iliad was only a story! So who knows if there would be a time evidence for Exodus was discovered?
(3) Therefore the Exodus actually happened.
(4) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM BIBLICAL PROPHECY
(1) The book of Daniel made some prophecies.
(2) The prophecy was later fulfilled by other records in the Book of Daniel.
(3) The prophecy came true!
(4) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM SHAME
(1) The Bible showed a group of people performing embarassing actions.
(2) It must be true if the book describes negative events.
(3) The Bible is describing historical events.
(4) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM EQUAL VALUE (PC argument II)
(1) Evolution and the scientific worldview is a worldview. Similarly, the biblical worldview is a worldview.
(2) You are not discriminating against our worldview are you?
(3) The Biblical worldview is as good as the scientific worldview.
(4) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM MODERATION (often employed by liberals)
(1) The Creationist side occupies an extreme side of the spectrum.
(2) Similarly, the atheist side occupies another extreme side of the spectrum.
(3) The liberals are in between.
(4) Therefore, the liberal position on God is the most correct.
(5) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM CHICK
(1) I have all these cool Jesus comics.
(2) I also think Eternal is smart with all those great arguments.
(3) Those comics sure convinced me!
(4) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM EVIDENTIAL ASSERTION (a.k.a. "Henry Morris Argument")
(1) God exists.
(2) Therefore all physical evidence (fossil record etc) must show this.
(3) Therefore it does.
(4) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM LACK OF MEANNESS
(1) If God didn't exist, it would be mean of him to make me believe he did!
(2) God isn't mean.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM WE ALL GOT FAITH
(1) We all believe in something.
(2) Therefore we all have faith.
(3) My faith in God is no different from your faith that the sun will rise tomorrow morning.
(4) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM COOLNESS
(1) That's really cool.
(2) God must have done that.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM WTC II
(1) Terrorists destroyed the WTC, killing thousands.
(2) An intact bible was found in the ruins.
(3) No, wait, it turns out it was a dictionary.
(4) Oh, well, God exists anyway.
ARGUMENT FROM COLLEGE FUNDING (usable by parents only)
(1) You believe in God.
(2) If I ever find out that you don't believe in God, you won't get any money for college!
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM SNOWFLAKES
(1) Out of 3,300 pictures of snow-crystals catalogued no two are exactly alike. Each has 6 points crossing at a 60 degree angle. If one is like a fern it has 6 out-pointing leaves; if like a windmill, It has 6 sails; if like a starfish, 6 ribs; or if like a fir tree, 6 stems with plumes set in perfect symmetry. This makes 3 distinct triangles to each flake. The Hebrew word for snow equals 333 (Hebrew letters stand for numbers).
(2) Could it not be that God has set His symbol of the Triune God in each flake? The average snow storm produces about 1000 billion crystals.
(3) Only an intelligent Being could design so many forms.
(4) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM CUSTODY (used by the parents of a friend of mine)
(1) We have legal custody of your son.
(2) If you don't act as though the Christian God existed, then we won't let you see him.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM FIDEISM (aka Martin Gardner's argument)
(1) Atheists are absolutely right. There is no logical reason to believe God exists.
(2) But he makes me feel good anyway.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
Argument from Pepper's Philosophy Class (AKA The Energy Argument)
(1) Things that exist have energy.
(2) Energy is alive.
(3) All living things are made from energy.
(4) Therefore, God Exists.
ARGUMENT FROM A BAD TRIP
(1) I went to a party and took LSD.
(2) I saw demons attacking me.
(3) Then Jesus came and drove the demons away.
(4) So I joined the Assemblies of God.
(5) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM STUPIDITY
(1) I am stupid.
(2) God made man in his own image.
(3) There are all horrible disasters going around the world.
(4) God is omnipotent in power.
(5) God is too stupid to do anything about these things.
(6) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM STAR TREK
(1) You will be assimilated.
(2) All your salvations belong to us.
(3) Resistance is futile.
(4) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM PRAYER
(1) When I pray, either it comes true or God has a better plan.
(2) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM DEMOCRACY
(1) God would never allow a non-Christian to become president.
(2) There has never been a non-Christian president.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM PAIN AVOIDANCE
(1) If I don't believe God exists, I'll go to Hell.
(2) Please don't hurt me.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM MOUNTAINS
(1) People used to think gods lived on Mt. Olympus.
(2) We've climbed Mt. Olympus and there were no gods there.
(3) Therefore, pagan gods are false.
(4) Therefore, the Christian God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM FUZZY ANIMALS (aka TELEOLOGICAL ARGUMENT III)
(1) Bunnies are cute.
(2) Cuteness is not an evolutionary advantage.
(3) Therefore, cuteness must have been designed.
(4) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM POLITICS
(1) The vast majority of the people believe in God.
(2) I'll get elected if I pretend to believe in God.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM PRESIDENTIAL IGNORANCE
(1) If I ask God to blesserize Texas, nobody'll mess with it.
(2) Nobody messes with Texas.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM COINCIDENCE
(1) We were driving home with our youth pastor when it started to rain really hard outside.
(2) We pulled over to the side of the road, joined hands and asked gawd to deliver us home safely.
(3) We arrived home safely.
(4) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM COMPUTERS
(1) I tried to delete a copy of the TEN COMMANDMENTS from my computer. It would not have mattered as I had another copy on file.
(2) Still the computer malfunctioned.
(3) The computer had more sense than atheists who made it.
(4) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM INVISIBILITY
(1) God is invisible.
(2) I can't see God.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM RAIN (aka PERCHANCE'S SISTER'S ARGUMENT III)
(1) I wanted it to be a sunny day.
(2) I prayed it wouldn't rain.
(3) We had two thunderstorms.
(4) Obviously, God didn't want to answer my prayer.
(5) Of course not! What a selfish thing to pray for! How dare I try to compel God to my selfish desires!
(6) The rain was God's punishment for my selfish desires.
(7) Therefore, God exists.
METACROCK'S ARGUMENT FOR GOD #1
(1) I Have a philosophy degree.
(2) Your knowledge in philosophy is paltry in comparison to mine.
(3) Therefore you are unable to comprehend my intense philosophical proofs proving God's existence.
(4) Therefore, God exists.
METACROCK'S ARGUMENT FOR GOD #2
(1) I created the term "arbitrary necessity".
(2) It is a golden principle and applies to whatever I say it does.
(3) I say an eternal universe is an arbitrary necessity.
(4) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM BEER
(1) "Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy." - Ben Franklin
(2) Beer exists.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM BEER II
(1) Christian: Whatever you believe in is your god.
(2) Atheist: I believe I'll have another beer.
(3) Ha ha.
(4) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM MONKEYS
(1) If man came from monkeys, there shouldn't be anymore monkeys.
(2) There are still monkeys.
(3) Therefore, God Exists.
ARGUMENT FROM C.S. LEWIS
(1) C.S. Lewis had a lot of good arguments in favor of Christianity... at least that’s what all my Christian friends tell me...
(2) C.S. Lewis wrote some popular books too!
(3) So anything C.S. Lewis said must be right!
(4) Therefore, God Exists.
ARGUMENT FROM UNIVERSAL DESTRUCTION
(1) I woke up this morning and found that the universe still exists.
(2) Therefore, its destruction was averted by God.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM DEAD FIREFIGHTERS
(1) All those dead firefighters were blessed by a Catholic priest before they gave their lives.
(2) For people they didn't even know!
(3) Yes, they were TOO mostly Catholics!
(4) I just know!
(5) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM TODD BEAMER
(1) Todd Beamer prayed "Our Father" with a switchboard operator after his flight was hijacked.
(2) Todd Beamer was a hero.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM FALWELL
(1) Jerry Falwell said some really stupid things after September 11th.
(2) Then he apologized!
(3) He was inspired by God to repent!
(4) No, it had nothing to do with the public outcry!
(5) Why? Because God told me so!
(6) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM SCIENTISTS
(1) Some famous scientists believed in God.
(2) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM FLOWERS
(1) That flower is pretty.
(2) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM INSTRUMENTATION
(1) You are an atheist.
(2) You did something kind.
(3) You are an instrument of God.
(4) God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM QUANTUM PHYSICS
(1) Quantum physics uses an uncertainty principle.
(2) There is room for God.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM THERMODYNAMICS
(1) The Second Law of Thermodynamics says that a closed system tends to disorder.
(2) The universe is ordered.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM SONGS
(1) The song "America the Beautiful" has the line "God shed his grace on thee."
(2) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM APOLOGETICS WEBPAGES
(1) I was surfing the Net and came across this really cool webpage of apologetics.
(2) Their arguments were stunning. I couldn't refute them.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM COMFORT
(1) All kinds of people have found comfort in religion.
(2) That means there must be something there to give comfort to them.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM BILL O'REILLY
(1) Atheism is challenging this country's Christian roots!
(2) We are Christians!
(3) We will make a big stink about this, and not let atheists win!
(4) We will win because God is on our side!
(5) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM EXILSTENTIALISIC LONELINESS
(1) This can't be all there is to existence.
(2) I mean it's so horrible, pointless, brutal and nasty.
(3) It's all so depressing.
(4) I'm lonely.
(5) There has to be something else out there.
(6) I mean it, there just has to be.
(7) THERE HAS TO BE SOMETHING ELSE OUT THERE!
(8) AGGGRRG!!! THERE JUST HAS TO BE!!!!
(9) God! He can be out there for me.
(10) I'm not so lonely now!
(11) Yay!
(12) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM SINS I LIKE (aka PERCHANCE'S SISTER'S ARGUMENT IV)
(1) I don't like abortion.
(2) But this is just my opinion.
(3) I want my opinion backed up with facts.
(4) But in the absence of facts, morals will do.
(5) Christians say abortion is a sin! Yeah! I have allies!
(6) But for a sin to exist and Christians to be right, God must exist.
(7) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM CHRISTIAN SOLIPSISM
(1) Nothing but Jesus is real.
(2) See #1.
The ARGUMENT FROM THE THRONE ROOM
(1) Would you stand in the presence of a mighty king and demand that he prove he exists?
(2) No?
(3) That's what you're doing with God, you arrogant bastards.
(4) I don't CARE that you can't see him!
(5) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM LACK OF IMAGINATION
(1) I couldn't imagine not believing in God.
(2) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM WOW
(1) "When I look into the sky and see all the pretty stars, all those galaxies..."
(2) Wow.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM KINDLY PSYCHOANALYSIS
(1) You say there's no God? Ah, someone calling themselves Christian must have really hurt you in the past
(2) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM CHRISTIAN EXPERTS ARE IGNORED
(1) Dembski, Behe and Plantinga are ignored by mainstream intellectuals
(2) Only a fear of the truth could explain this.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM CHRISTIAN EXPERTS ARE NOT IGNORED
(1) Mainstream intellectuals are paying some attention to Dembski, Behe and Plantinga.
(2) Only a growing recognition of the truth could explain this.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM COUNTERFACTUAL EVIDENCE
(1) You claim the evidence for Jesus' divinity is non-existent.
(2) But if there was lots of evidence, you would still not be convinced.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM UNSEEN MIRACLES
(1) Atheists wouldn't believe in God even if He showed up and performed a miracle for them.
(2) See! There was a miracle right over there! Didn't you see it?
(3) No?
(4) You must be an atheist. Therefore, you cannot see miracles.
(5) But miracles happen. You just can't see them.
(6) Likewise, God exists. You just can't see Him, because you are so determined not to.
(7) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM WIND
(1) You believe in wind.
(2) But you can't see it.
(3) God's the same way
(4) It IS TOO analogous!
(5) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM WARREN ROBINETT
(1) There's a secret message in the video game "Adventure."
(2) It reveals that the game was Created By Warren Robinett.
(3) It's the same way with the world.
(4) Look for the secret messages, and you will find the World's Creator.
(5) Therefore, God Exists.
ARGUMENT FROM OFFENSIVENESS (aka GOODY2SHOES'S ARGUMENT)
(1) You keep making statements that I think are generalizations, hypocritical, and bigoted.
(2) I will only agree to stay if you stop that.
(3) [non-believer tries to be non-offensive]
(4) You're still offending me because of [insert random statement here].
(5) [non-believer rereads her posts before posting, posting when she thinks she is not being offensive].
(6) I'm offended!
(7) [non-believer tears her hair out trying to figure out how to be non-offensive]
(8) This conversation is just the two of us. I think we should stop this conversation.
(9) [non-believer figures 'Fuck it' and posts what she really thinks]
(10) WOW! WHAT A BIGOT! I'm leaving!
(11) I have a spiritual victory.
(12) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM MULTIPLICITY 2 (TERCEL'S ARGUMENT)
(1) I have a large number of arguments for God.
(2) There is a small chance that each of them is true.
(3) Using voodoo probability calculations, this means that there is a much greater chance that all of them are true taken together!
(4) And this ISN'T just the mathematical version of the Ontological Proof, I'm a real mathematician and you obviously can't understand this proof because you don't know as much about math as me.
(5) Oh, and don't confuse things by mentioning how many atheistic arguments there are, and the probability of each of them being correct...
(6) Or the fact that I basically pulled the probability of each of my arguments being correct out of my ass...
(7) And admit that I know more about math than you, and you'll see that...
(8) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM TRAUMATIC EXPERIENCES
(1) One time, I was in deep emotional pain.
(2) I prayed to God, and felt His presence.
(3) You aren't going to deny my emotional pain, are you?
(4) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM ABUSING THE BODY
(1) One time, I fasted for three days straight, prayed on my knees for hours, and didn't sleep, either.
(2) At the end of that time, God answered me.
(3) You see, you just have to mortify the flesh and accept the things of the spirit in order to meet God.
(4) No, there is no possibility that it was a hallucination!
(5) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM ECSTASY (used by a number of saints)
(1) I woke up last night with a feeling of indescribable pleasure and joy.
(2) It couldn't have been sexual; I'm holy and never have thoughts like those.
(3) So the ecstasy must have come from God.
(4) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM KENT HOVIND
(1) I don't want to work for a living.
(2) I don't want to pay taxes.
(3) I can get gullible fundamentalists to send me money.
(4) I can use religious exemption claims to tie the IRS up in court.
(5) Therefore, God exists!
ARGUMENT FROM FEELING LOVE ALL AROUND (aka PERCHANCE'S SISTER'S ARGUMENT V)
(1) I can just feel love all around me. I know the world is a good place, that people are essentially good, and that that comes from God.
(2) I don't know how I know. It's just there. You've never felt it?
(3) I don't know how I know. Stop pestering me!
(4) [tears until nasty non-believer goes away]
(5) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM MUSIC (could also be used for art)
(1) You like classical music.
(2) Classical composers wrote for God.
(3) [non-believer points out that they had to compose for the Church or they would have been executed]
(4) But they wrote for God and you like the music.
(5) Therefore, God Exists.
ARGUMENT FROM SADISM I
(1) I enjoy beating children.
(2) I find some justification for it in the Bible.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM SADISM II
(1) I enjoy treating women like dirt. It makes me feel powerful.
(2) I find some justification for it in the Bible.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM THE BIBLE (2?)
(1) The Bible says the Bible is true.
(2) Therefore the Bible is true.
(3) The Bible says God exists.
(4) Therefore, God exist.
WILLIAM JAMES' ARGUMENT
(1) We should give people the benefit of the doubt.
(2) When someone says God exists, we should believe them.
(3) A lot of people say God exists.
(4) Therefore, God exists.
PASCAL'S ARGUMENT
(1) If God exists, it would be really cool.
(2) If God didn't exist, it would really suck.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
THE BIBLICAL PRESERVATION ARGUMENT
(1) The Bible hasn't changed much since it was written.
(2) Therefore everything in it must be true.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
BIBLICAL PROPHECIES ARGUMENT
(1) Jesus clearly fulfilled all the prophecies of the Jews.
(2) That's why there are no Jews alive today.
(3) If you see a Jew, you should probably kill him to make #2 work.
(4) Therefore, God exists.
THE STEWARDSHIP ARGUMENT
(1) God gave us the earth to take care of it.
(2) We take care of it.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM THE 2nd LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS
(1) All systems become chaotic.
(2) The Universe, too, will become chaotic.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM ATHEISM
(1) Unicorns don't exist.
(2) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM THE MEANING OF LIFE
(1) What's the meaning of life?
(2) [atheist gives their answer]
(3) That's not what I believe.
(4) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM LOGIC
(1) There are some things in logic that you can't logically demonstrate.
(2) Therefore you have to take them on faith.
(3) Your faith in logic is the same as my faith in God.
(4) Therefore, God exists.
VELIKOVSKY'S ARGUMENT
(1) If you twist the details enough, you can make a case for Venus, as a comet, causing the Biblical catastrophes.
(2) Therefore the Bible is true.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM CAN'T-BE-A-RACIST
(1) Martin Luther King, Jr. believed in God.
(2) I don't think you want to say Dr. King was a fool?
(3) That's what I thought.
(4) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM JESUS’ TORTURE
(1) No one ever, ever suffered as much as Jesus did on the cross.
(2) No, not the victims of the Inquisition.
(3) No, not the women burned at the stake or hanged as witches.
(4) No, not all the people who died thinking they were going to Hell!!!
(5) Who but God would suffer like that for us ungrateful, unworthy humans?
(6) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM SEVERABILITY
(1) Lots of ridiculous statements are made by people who only claim to be Real Christians.
(2) They just give Real Christians a bad name.
(3) Real Christians don't believe is literally true.
(4) But that doesn't mean the Bible isn't still mostly true.
(5) And the Bible is the Word of God.
(6) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM BECAUSE
(1) Because.
(2) Therefore, God exists.
ELABORATED ARGUMENT FROM BECAUSE
(1) Because.
(2) Because why?
(3) Because!
(4) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM "LET'S JUST BELIEVE" (aka TAFFY LEWIS'S ARGUMENT)
(1) All belief systems should be treated the same as the scientific one.
(2) [non-believer: Why?]
(3) Because they have their own grounds.
(4) Anyway, that's my experience of how the world works.
(5) [non-believer: It's not mine. And why should you treat claims of unicorns less seriously than claims of gods?]
(6) I don't believe there are unicorns.
(7) But I believe there are gods.
(8) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM UNIQUE EXISTENCE
(1) God exists but not in a way that anything else that exists exists.
(2) Since there are no other things that exist as God exists, we are free to make up things about God's state of existence that ensure his continued non-observability
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM POSITIVE RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE (aka TAFFY LEWIS'S ARGUMENT II)
(1) More people have had positive religious experiences in the context of Western theism.
(2) Therefore, God is kind, just, and all-loving.
(3) [non-believer: What about the people who have had negative experiences? Or experiences of God's non-existence?]
(4) They don't count.
(5) Therefore, God is just the way I describe him to be.
(5a) Oh, yeah. And God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM RIGHTS
(1) The Declaration of Independence founded the U.S.
(2) Therefore, the Declaration of Independence is true.
(3) The Declaration of Independence says that our rights are "endowed by our Creator."
(4) George W. agrees with this.
(5) You have rights, don't you???
(6) Well where the f*** do you think they came from???
(7) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM FUTURE EVIDENCE
(1) Look, I realize that it doesn't seem to make sense that there would logically be a God.
(2) However, I know He's real, and that in the future I think that maybe something will happen probably that will show you all.
(3) Therefore, God Exists.
ARGUMENT FROM POSTULATE
(1) To fully understand the following demonstration, you must first assume that God exists.
(2) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM POOR TYPING SKILLS
(1) In tihs essae ill demnstrate that gOd exsits in a way tat's so sure thatno athesit can PSOosibly reftue. J will firts dwmonsrtate waht we canaSSUme fo rGod exisnce,,then how wwe can refute anya rgument wihch pretends teh contrrary to eb true,tehn wel'l expose scinetific evidnece thatGod eeexists then we'll cnolcude. yOU will fnid an acurate&up6to6date bibliography no teh page 43 of tihs essay;i Sugegst yu to pritn iths doculent for a mroe confortable raeding.
(2) [Atheist doesn't bother to read it]
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM UNTRANSLATED OLD FRENCH
(1) « Mais pourceque j'avois déjà connu en moi très clairement que la nature intelligente est distincte de la corporelle; considérant que toute composition témoigne de la dépendance, et que la dépendance est manifestement un défaut, je jugeois de là que ce ne pouvoit être une perfection en Dieu d'être composé de ces deux natures, et que par conséquent il ne l'étoit pas; mais que s'il y avoit quelques corps dans le monde, ou bien quelques intelligences ou autres natures qui ne fussent point toutes parfaites, leur être devoit dépendre de sa puissance, en telle sorte quelles ne pouvoient subsister sans lui un seul moment. » -- René Descartes, Discours de la Méthode
(2) How could you possibly refute that?
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM CLEVER USE OF VOCABULARY
(1) Many atheists will not be convinced by an argument with "Therefore, God exists" as its conclusion.
(2) Consequently, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM IGNORANCE
(1) I don't understand evolution, I mean how could there be nothing then something?
(2) (Well informed atheist gives articulate explanation of evolution and gently explains that the beginning of the universe has nothing to do with evolution.)
(3) Well it seems way too complicated and unlikely to me. Plus I don't want to live my life thinking I evolved from a monkey.
(4) Therefore, God exists and Jesus died for our sins.
(5) (Atheist argues that theist's ignorance of evolution does not logically lead to the conclusion that there is a God, let alone the Christian God.)
(6) Says you! God bless.
(7) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM CHURCH
(1) Lots of people go to church.
(2) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM PHOTO-OP (ARGUMENT FROM THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE II)
(1) A couple of godless commie federal judges ruled the 1954 inclusion of "under God" in the Pledge unconstitutional.
(2) Almost immediately thereafter, the whole U.S. Senate recited the Pledge, including "under God," on the Capitol steps.
(3) The Senators' conduct was not--I repeat, NOT--mere political posturing and/or vote whoring.
(4) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM DEFENESTRATION
(1) If God exists, then He will protect me if I jump out this third story window.
(2) However, you will not be so fortunate, unsaved heathen!
(3) *shove*
(4) See! God didn't protect you, just like I predicted! Any counterarguments, heathen?
(5) No? Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM MUSHROOMS
(1) This pizza tastes funny.
(2) That purple llama on the ceiling is juggling chainsaws.
(3) Purple llamas can't juggle chainsaws.
(4) It must be a miracle!
(5) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM MYTHOLOGY
(1) The Old Religions were wrong.
(2) The Old Religions didn't believe in the same god as me.
(3) Therefore, I must be right.
(4) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM ACCUSATION
(1) The Bible says that everyone knows God exists.
(2) Therefore, YOU know that God exists.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM NOT-BELIEVING
(1) The New Testament says people like you would question us.
(2) You question us.
(3) Therefore the bible is true.
(4) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM BANANAS
(1) Bananas have many characteristics that make them attractive as primate food.
(2) They're so good that they must have been designed.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM METEORS (FALWELL'S ARGUMENT)
(1) God hates gay people.
(2) God is merciful.
(3) Disney World held a Gay Day parade.
(4) God could punish Disney World by sending hurricanes, earthquakes, and possibly a meteor to Florida.
(5) God didn't, thus proving both postulate 1 and 2.
(6) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM COAL MINERS
(1) A bunch of miners got trapped.
(2) A bunch of people worked around the clock for a week to rescue them.
(3) They were all found alive.
(4) Only God could have done that.
(5) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM YOUTH GROUP MINISTER
(1) God is awesome!
(2) Like, totally, dude!
(3) Therefore, God, like, exists and stuff.
ARGUMENT FROM PERSONAL INABILITY
(1) The Bible says Jesus turned water into wine.
(2) Can you turn water into wine?
(3) No? Well there ya go.
(4) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM PERSONAL ABILITY
(1) I prayed to God, and then lifted a car off my trapped puppy.
(2) I couldn't have done that without God.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM DIVINE OPPOSITION
(1) Satan is bad.
(2) You don't want to be on Satan's side, do you?
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM DIVINE OPPOSITION AS USED BY A YOUTH GROUP MINISTER
(1) Satan really sucks, dude.
(2) You don't wanna, like, be like Satan, right dude?
(3) Therefore God, like, exists and stuff. Totally.
ARGUMENT FROM BUFFALO (aka TELEOLOGICAL ARGUMENT IV)
(1) The Indians used every part of the buffalo.
(2) A creature we can use every part of couldn't have just randomly evolved!
(3) It had to be created specifically for us!
(4) Therefore, God exists, and spent his early years churning out Buffalo.
ARGUMENT FROM DENTAL OPPORTUNITY
(1) Bite me.
(2) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM DENTAL OPPORTUNITY, ACCEPTED
(1) Bite me.
(2) OW! YOU BIT ME!
(3) I'm being persecuted!!
(4) Therefore, God exists!
ARGUMENT FROM NEW AGEYNESS
(1) If enough people just believe, God will exist.
(2) Lots of people have been believing for a very long time.
(3) Therefore, surely by NOW, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM ROUNDNESS (aka TELEOLOGICAL ARGUMENT V)
(1) Isn't it amazing how perfectly round the planets are?
(2) Someone sure must have been in control of that "big bang" in order for them to shape up like that!
(3) Just place a stick of dynamite under a huge rock. You'll see that the explosion does not produce perfectly round smaller rocks.
(4) Therefore, God exists.
(optional)
(3a) Atheist: The planets are round because of gravity.
(3b) But who made gravity?!?!
(4) Therefore, God exists!
ARGUMENT FROM FAITH IN THE OBVIOUS
(1) You have faith that the sun will rise tomorrow, don't you?
(2) See! Atheists have faith too!
(3) Just like I have faith in Jesus.
(4) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM IMPLIED BEAUTY (aka TELEOLOGICAL ARGUMENT VI)
(1) If you evolved, you'd be pretty ugly.
(2) Look how beautiful you are, and the world that is around you.
(3) Only God could have made you so beautiful.
(4) I don't care that beauty is totally subjective, you are beautiful in God's eyes!
(5) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM BRAINWASHING
(1) Atheists claim Christians have been brainwashed by churches.
(2) We can just as easily say that they have been brainwashed by secular colleges & universities in their futile thinking, and secular reasoning.
(3) Your brainwashing keeps you from the Truth.
(4) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM COMMUNISM
(1) All communists are atheists.
(2) All communists are bad, haven't you watched the 6 o'clock news?
(3) Therefore they are wrong.
(4) Since the moral majority is theist and non-communist they are good.
(5) Therefore they are right.
(6) This argument does so make sense!
(7) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM GOOD AND BAD BEHAVIOR
(1) Sometimes I do good things and sometimes I do bad things.
(2) When I do something good this PROVES that God, my Guardian Angel etc are helping me to be good.
(3) Praise the Lord! Praise the Lord! Oh God help me to be strong and steadfast against temptation till I die so that You God will not in Your infinite mercy, send me to Hell.
(4) When I do something bad this PROVES that the Devil has tempted me to do EVIL.
(5) Whatever I do it proves that either God or the Devil is real.
(6) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM BEER II
(1) Real men like beer.
(2) God allowed real men to make beer.
(3) Therefore, God is real, and likes beer.
ARGUMENT FROM TAXATION
(1) Churches don't pay taxes.
(2) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM GOD'S PLAN (variation of the MYSTERIOUS WAYS argument)
(1) There is a plan in the world.
(2) The existence of this plan can be seen from the fact that things are the way they are.
(3) My belief is part of the plan, and so is your non-belief.
(4) [atheist: Why?]
(5) The plan is too infinitely great for our minds to comprehend the "why."
(6) An infinitely great plan must have an infinitely great mind behind it.
(7) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM HAULING ASS
(1) [theist creates message board account and logs in]
(2) "GOD IS REEL AND ALL YOU HEATHEN ATHEIST INFEDILS WILL BERN IN HELL FORE-EVER MARK MY WERDS!!!!!!!!@#3FD"
(3) [theist logs off and never returns]
(4) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM BAPTIST BOARD II
(1) God calls us to be a peculiar people.
(2) Stop laughing, foul non-believer.
(3) In order to preserve our own particular peculiarity-
(4) Stop laughing, I said.
(5) We must be a people apart.
(6) This means not listening to anyone who believes differently than we do, because this would taint our peculiarity.
(7) If you do not stop laughing-
(8) (Oh, I have to do the end of the argument).
(9) Therefore, God exists.
(9a) And God especially exists because non-believers are laughing at us, which means we're persecuted, which means we're special.
(10) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENTUM AD TINKERTOYUM (aka TELEOLOGICAL ARGUMENT VII)
(1) Take some tinkertoys and make several "creations".
(2) Take the creations apart and dump the pieces in a plastic bag.
(3) Shake the pieces up and dump them on the floor. Repeat as many times as you wish.
(4) The tinkertoys will never reassemble themselves into the original creations.
(5) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM HOSPITAL (aka ARGUMENT FROM MIRACLES II)
(1) A dear relative of mine was terminally ill and undergoing extensive surgery in the hospital.
(2) My whole family sat outside the OR and prayed through the entire eight hours of surgery.
(3) He lived.
(4) No, the highly trained physicians had nothing to do with it, unbeliever!
(5) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM WEIRD
(1) You look weird, atheist.
(2) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM ALIENS
(1) I was once abducted by aliens.
(2) What we call aliens are really demons, the bible says so.
(3) If demons exist, than so does God.
(4) You've seen the X-files, haven't you?
(5) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM REVELATION
(1) God told me that he exists.
(2) God wouldn't lie.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM FORCE
(1) [argument from atheist]
(2) [theist shoots atheist]
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM NAZIISM (INVERSE-GODWIN)
(1) Hitler didn't establish a Christian theocracy.
(2) Therefore, Hitler was an atheist.
(3) Hitler was the worst leader possible.
(4) Therefore, all atheists are bad people.
(5) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM UNCONSCIOUS THEISM
(1) Atheists think the universe created life.
(2) Well, they should if they thought about it really, really hard.
(3) But only a God can create life.
(4) So atheists should believe in God, if they weren't so dumb.
(5) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM COMMUNICATION FROM GOD
(1) I had this incredible experience that could only be explained by a communication from God.
(2) Atheist says, "couldn't there be a natural explanation?"
(3) No, I'm telling you there is no way this could be explained naturally.
(4) Atheist suggests alternate explanations q,r,s,t,u,v,w,x,y and z.
(5) No, none of those can explain it.
(6) Because they can't!
(7) Atheist is not convinced.
(8) How dare you deny my very special experience!
(9) Atheist tries to explain that s/he's only questioning the theist's interpretation of that experience, and not the claim that something special was experienced.
(10) You just don't want to believe that what I experienced is from God, because you are a closed-minded, dogmatic materialist!
(11) And also, you are a big meanie and I'm not talking to you anymore!
(12) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM COLTRANE
(1) John Coltrane's "A Love Supreme" is dedicated to God.
(2) John Coltrane's "A Love Supreme" is full of passion.
(3) Atheists cannot explain Coltrane's passion in "A Love Supreme."
(4) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM GEORGE HARRISON
(1) George Harrison wrote "My Sweet Lord."
(2) It's one of the most beautiful pop songs ever, and one of the only pop songs devoted to God.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM BEING A CATHOLIC
(1) The pope believes in God.
(2) The pope is infallible.
(3) I am catholic and like the pope.
(4) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM GAME THEORY
(1) Theist: [after lengthy explanation] Hence, pursuant to game theory, belief in an afterlife is the most sensible option.
(2) Atheist: Wait a minute. That's just Pascal's Wager dressed in different verbiage.
(3) Theist: Nuh uh!
(4) Therefore, God exists.
"TRUE BECAUSE IT IS INCONSISTENT" ARGUMENT
(1) If the Bible were cooked up by some smooth-talking manipulative authors, it would have been perfect and seamless and without any apparent inconsistencies.
(2) But the Bible IS inconsistent, erroneous, and plain goofy at many places
(3) So the Bible is NOT a product of some smooth-talking manipulative authors.
(4) Hence the Bible is the word of God.
(5) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM BUZZWORDS
(1) As game theory clearly shows, the irreducibly complex nature of the universe indicates probabilistic fine-tuning at the quantum level and renders God logically necessary.
(2) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM THINGS HURT (I)
(1) Things hurt.
(2) Atheists think that things aren't supposed to hurt.
(3) They really are whiney, aren't they?
(4) Christians are stronger than that.
(5) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM THINGS HURT (II)
(1) Some things hurt a lot.
(2) Atheists think that things aren't supposed to hurt.
(3) But since they can't derive "ought" from "is," their belief presupposes the existence of God.
(4) Therefore, God exists.
EXISTENTIAL ARGUMENT FROM EVIL / ARGUMENT FROM POWER
(1) I have a gun.
(2) [atheist: "Ouch!!!"]
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM RELIGIOUS DIVERSITY
(1) Atheists think that the difference in religions disproves God's existence.
(2) Eh, To-may-to, to-mah-to.
(3) Everyone knows that you must accept Jesus Christ in order to be saved.
(4) Well, everyone who matters, anyway.
(5) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM RELIGIOUS LANGUAGE
(1) God exists.
(2) Therefore, when I talk about God or related concepts, these words denote something.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM EVOLUTION
(1) Science is always true.
(2) Science says that there is a vanishingly small chance that all of this could have happened on its own.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM SCIENCE
(1) Science is not always true.
(2) Therefore there is room for religious faith.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM THE PAIN PLAN (aka LUVLUV'S ARGUMENT)
(1) Things hurt.
(2) Things hurting are part of God's plan.
(3) A lot of the good things in life only come through suffering.
(4) This is necessary to achieve God's plan.
(5) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM GUNS II
(1) We have a gun.
(2) In fact, we have a lot more guns than you do.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM MONTY PYTHON
(1) Graham Chapman appeared in a film that made fun of Jesus.
(2) Graham Chapman died of a horrible, incurable disease.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
(3a) And has no sense of humor.
ARGUMENT FROM WAR
(1) War is hell.
(2) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM ELVIS (adapted from a church sign)
(1) Some people call Elvis the King.
(2) But we know Jesus is King.
(3) Even non-believers can have a glimpse of wisdom.
(4) Therefore, God exists.
LINGUAL ARGUMENT
(1) There's existence in nonexistence so...
(2) God exists even if he doesn't.
(3) God exists.
DIVINE POWERS ARGUMENT
(1) God’s existence must be the work of God.
(2) God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM OPPRESSION (related to the various ARGUMENTS FROM OFFENSIVENESS)
(1) God exists.
(2) [atheist asks any one of various questions, or even just starts to ask them]
(3) Are you saying that God doesn't exist?
(4) You're oppressing me! You're depriving me of the right to believe in God if I want to!
(5) Oppression is bad.
(6) Therefore, you are bad.
(7) Therefore, you must be wrong.
(8) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM WHEAT
(1) A grain of wheat will always fall to the ground and the outer shell “dies”.
(2) But see, eventually the grain will grow into a fuller, more vital form.
(3) Hey, that's kinda like the Resurrection!
(4) Therefore, God Exists.
ARGUMENT FROM WARM & FUZZY THINGS
(1) When I was an atheist, I didn't have any warm & fuzzy things in my life.
(2) I really like warm & fuzzy things.
(3) If the J-C God exists, lots of warm & fuzzy things are true because all these really smart theists say so.
(4) Therefore, God exists.
(5) Old Testament? Never heard of it.
ARGUMENT FROM SCIENCE II
(1) Everything was fine until man created science.
(2) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM AMERICA
(1) God bless America.
(2) You're either for us or against us remember.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM MASSIVE OPIATES
(1) Got to keep the public distracted.
(2) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM KING JOSIAH
(1) Time to expand the kingdom.
(2) Therefore (only one) God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM ASHCROFT
(1) I say God exists.
(2) I could have you locked up, you know.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM IT'S MY BALL AND YOU CAN'T PLAY
(1) There is abundant logical and empirical evidence that God does not exist.
(2) There is no evidence that God does exist.
(3) But God plays by completely different rules.
(4) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM DISCOMFORT
(1) I am happy, believing in God.
(2) Then you come along and say all this nasty stuff to take my happiness away.
(3) *sniff*... *sniff*... why are you making me uncomfortable?
(4) Anyone who makes other people uncomfortable must be different. And bad. And ignorant.
(5) Daddy will hug me!
(6) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM ARTIFACT
(1) Archeologists found the remains of a boat from Jesus' time.
(2) So the bible is true.
(3) Therefore, God exists
ARGUMENT FROM LITTLE BABIES
(1) Sometimes a bad person hurts little babies because he doesn't have a happy life.
(2) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM LITTLE BABIES II
(1) Sometimes little babies are different from one another - how could you explain that?! Like, one will be really happy, and another will be sad. Sometimes even twins.
(2) This proves the existence of the soul.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM A VIDEO I WATCHED WITH MY DAD"
(1) Me and my dad watched this video where the Virgin Mary appeared on a building in Egypt. No, it was kinda blurry... lots of people saw it though and they were pointing at it.
(2) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM WHAT YEAR IT IS
(1) The years of our calendar are dated from the birth of Christ.
(2) Therefore, atheists can't even live without making reference to Christ.
(3) Obviously, atheists really can't live apart from God, even though they say they can.
(4) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM GOD-CENTRISM
(1) Everything revolves around God, even the earth and the sun.
(2) Therefore, even atheists are revolving around God!
(3) Silly, aren't they, to deny the truth?
(4) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM UNKNOWN QUALITIES
(1) God has qualities we mere humans can't possibly know.
(2) This answers all atheistic arguments.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM FORGIVING MISGUIDEDNESS
(1) Theist: X, Y, and Z all prove God's love for mankind - This love proves he exists.
(2) Atheist: But I can refute X, Y, Z and unsaid arguments A, B, and C...
(3) Theist: Don't worry, you're wrong and your questioning of God will send you to hell, but he loves you and I forgive you your arrogance.
(4) Atheist: But you haven't said anything rational.
(5) Theist: Jesus/God *loves* you. Duh. Therefore God exists.
(6) Repeat 4, [3|5] ad infinitum.
ARGUMENT FROM FEELING GOD'S PRESENCE
(1) Atheists just haven't truly felt God's presence yet.
(2) If they had ever felt God's presence, they would not be atheists.
(3) Theists have truly felt God's presence.
(4) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM WHAT MAKES SENSE
(1) Doesn't it just make more sense that an all-knowing, all-powerful, all-good deity created the world out of nothingness, from magic, essentially, and then punished us for eating a piece of fruit, and then incarnated himself in human flesh and came down to shed his own blood so he could break his own rules, and then went through hell on a temporary basis and then went back into the sky and promised to come back and take everyone who believed in him to this heaven no one has ever seen?
(2) Well, doesn't it?
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM WHAT MAKES SENSE, ADDENDUM
(1) Atheist: No it doesn't.
(2) Theist: See, you're confusing the issue again! Think Simple and Sensible!
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN
(1) Scientific American published an article that shows creationism is nonsense.
(2) The first editor of Scientific American was a Christian.
(3) Therefore, whoever wrote that article is a traitor and a liar.
(4) Besides, Scientific American didn't hire a creationist in the 70s, so they're obviously trying to persecute Christians.
(5) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN (II)
(1) Answers in Genesis copied the full text of an article from Scientific American.
(2) Scientific American sent one email to Answers in Genesis saying that they don't necessarily want their articles distributed for free in the internet by just anyone.
(3) See? Scientific American persecutes Christians!
(4) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM PEPPERED MOTHS
(1) Science textbooks still use the "peppered moths" to prove evolution.
(2) Atheist says that he has never seen a textbook which claims anything of the sort, in fact the only place he hears about peppered moths is from creationist websites.
(3) Obviously the atheist has no clue what he's talking about then.
(4) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM GOD IS LIKE A RADIO SIGNAL
(1) There are many radio signals floating around your head all the time.
(2) God is on one of them.
(3) You just have to listen to the right signal.
(4) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM AGNOSTICISM IN INDIA
(1) [non-believer asks if the theist would still call his religious experiences Christian if he had been raised in another country]
(2) Would you call your agnostic experiences agnostic if you had been raised in India?
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM BESTSELLERDOM
(1) The Bible is the best-selling work in history.
(2) Now, just because it's popular doesn't mean it's the Word of God.
(3) But there's not much evidence to suggest it's not.
(4) [sound of non-believer spitting milk out her nose]
(5) Therefore, God exists.
MODIFIED TRILEMMA ARGUMENT
(1) Jesus was either lord, liar, or lunatic.
(2) Can you PROVE He was a liar or lunatic?
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM OTHERWISE THERE WOULD BE ANARCHY
(1) There has to be an objective truth to the universe, and humans have to be able to access it.
(2) Otherwise, there would be anarchy everywhere.
(3) No courts or governments or anything.
(4) [non-believer falls out of her chair from laughing so hard]
(5) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM DIVINE RIGHT
(1) God saves the queen.
(2) The queen hasn't died.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM SQUARE CIRCLES
(1) There is no such thing as a square circle.
(2) God is not a square circle.
(3) Therefore, God exists
ARGUMENT FROM DICTATORSHIP
(1) Dictators do not believe in God.
(2) Dictators are wrong.
(3) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM TERROR (Martin Luther's argument)
(1) The lightning storm filled me with the terror of God's wrath.
(2) Therefore, God exists.
ARGUMENT FROM MEANING
(1) Nothing has meaning without God.
(2) I mean...
(3) Therefore, God exists.
Ergo
666. ARGUMENT FROM ASSUMPTION
(1) Therefore, God exists.