God Exists Only in the Minds of His Followers

I still find it strange that my opponent, whose profile declares them an atheist, is vehemently defending God, while not saying they are a Devil's Advocate. Either clarify that, or change your profile, because I am perplexed by this. Moving on. 1. God Does Not Exist 1.1 Descartes Argument Absolute perfection, which is what God claims to have, would in effect make everything in existence perfect, as a perfect thing would be perfectly willing and perfectly able to do this. This is not the case, therefore the "perfect" God of the Bible is an innate fallacy. 1.2 Lewis Argument My opponent presupposes that natural laws have a purpose, and therefore were given a purpose. This is a strawman, as they do NOT have a presupposed purpose. They simply are. They are rigid and unchangeable, and couldn't have been "created" as anything that could conceivably create them would still answer to the laws that govern existence. 1.3 Pascal's Wager Pascal's wager does not make a TRUE believer. Pascal's wager tries to coerce nonbelievers into submission. This is a refined way of saying, "possessing beliefs contrary to my own will submit you to eternal torment." In the second part of his rebuttal, and to my disgust, my opponent defends rule by fear. Societies that rules through terror and coercion are invariably condemned by history. Stalin, Pol Pot, Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini, Franco Francisco, and Fidel Castro. These dictators are referred to as such in History textbooks. They are condemned for their use of terror. God did not "invent" morality. God would answer to morality. Despite the massacre of atheists and homosexuals being supported in the Bible, a CHILD could tell that would be wrong. 1.4 Kant Argument My opponent says that there is strong evidence that God is the source of logic, and of course doesn't source it... then why are 93% of surveyed scientists atheist? Those who have the deepest understanding of the world around us dismiss the idea of the God of the Bible. Logic would come from the evolution of intelligence to compensate for our meager form when we transitioned from tree to ground-dwelling animals. This is MY evidence, and I haven't seen my opponent's yet. 2. Bible is inaccurate 2.1.1 Great Flood No, there is NO scientifically relevant data suggesting a worldwide flood, otherwise it would be mentioned in SCIENCE texts, which it isn't. The only two websites cited are thebibleistheotherside.org and answersincreation.org, and we are expected to believe they will have any scientific insight? The religious gather facts to support a conclusion, while scientists draw conclusions based on facts. I ask that my opponent try to cite a scientific site that supports a worldwide flood. Then I may be convinced. 2.1.2 Adam and Eve I apologize, but it is sometimes hard for me to keep my temper in check when someone insists that evolution is disproven. Please just read the citations I make, otherwise I fear I may blow my top.[1][2] 2.1.3 Age of the Earth Actually, my opponent has utterly lied for his argument. After being studied by Christians, it was discovered the Bible's age of the Earth IS ~6100 Years, which makes my opponent's arguments fallacious and irrelevant.[3] 2.1.4 Bible's Claim to Perfect word of God Destroyed by previous arguments. 2.2 Historically 2.2.1 Jesus It is possible a man by the name of Jesus existed around the time of the Biblical Jesus, but if such a amn had performed such myriad miracles as he did, and if he had been publicly crrucified, there would probably be records of THAT, which there isn't. If Jesus existed, he was just a nice guy, not the son of a God that doesn't exist. 2.2.2 Israel Narrative Again, completely irrelevant to an ontological argument. 2.3 Scientifically 2.3.1 Big Bang Where does it say, "And then god layed out the heavens and the Earth in a massive expansion of matter, and it took billions of years to cool. And he saw it was good." 2.3.2 Universe like a tent No evidence it was erected by god. It is nebulous[4], and not like a tent. Moving on. 2.3.3 Space is vacuum "A perfect vacuum would be one with no particles in it at all, which is impossible to achieve in practice.[5]" Perfect vacuum is impossible. Moving on. 2.3.4 Air has weight "He has weighed out the wind, and fixed the scope of the waters" Doesn't sound like a scientific statement to me. Sounds like mumbo-jumbo that a scientist wouldn't look at and say, "Oh, I guess air is affected by gravity!" Moving on. 2.3.5 Stars' Light Intensity Common sense of no perfect similarity. "A splendor all its own" does not equate to "Every star is unique" 2.3.6 Subjective Splendor, Sun = Star The Bible made a distinction, and must not have known that the sun was just a star. It must not have known that the moon's "splendor" was just a reflection. 2.3.7 Ocean Springs I thought you yourself said not to use semantics as an argument? 2.3.8 "Dragons" Another argument of semantics. If God created dinosaurs, why weren't they saved from Naoh's flood? They breathed through their nose. 2.3.9 Cave men A man in a cave =/= A Caveman. Caveman refers to a Neanderthal,[6] which is NOT mentioned in the Bible. 3. Morality 3.1 Babylon? So, because these children are from Babylon, it was okay for them to be dashed on a rock on front of their parents? I think not. 3.2 Death =/= Death Leviticus 20:9 "For every one that curseth his father or his mother shall be surely put to death..." My opponent states: "This rule does not permit human killing." Of course it doesn't. Just like you didn't hit someone if you hit them! Makes just as much sense as what you said. 3.3 Beautiful, beautiful plunder Deut 21:10-12 "When thou goest forth to war against thine enemies, and the LORD thy God hath delivered them into thine hands, and thou hast taken them captive, And seest among the captives a beautiful woman, and hast a desire unto her, that thou wouldest have her to thy wife; Then thou shalt bring her home to thine house, and she shall shave her head, and pare her nails..." And my opponent says: "The woman is a symbol for all beautiful material..." So... you marry and shave a pile of gold, too? Methinks the beautiful woman is symbolic of a beautiful woman. 3.4 Bonus Passage! 2 Kings 2:23-24: "And he [Elisha] went up from thence unto Bethel: and as he was going up by the way, there came forth little children out of the city, and mocked him, and said unto him, Go up, thou bald head; go up, thou bald head. And he turned back, and looked on them, and cursed them in the name of the LORD. And there came forth two she bears out of the wood, and tare forty and two children of them." Perfectly justifiable! Right? You call my prophet bald, I let two bears make hamburger out of you! 4. The Invisible Pink Unicorn I cannot "disprove" God. Then again, you can't "disprove" The Invisible Pink Unicorn. Why? Because, conveniently, they are beyond the 5 senses! So go ahead, try your hardest to disprove the Invisible Pink Unicorn! I bet he'll end up looking A LOT like God. Source(s): [1] - http://ncse.com... [2] - http://news.nationalgeographic.com... [3] - http://www.albatrus.org... [4] - http://www.all-creatures.org... [5] - http://en.wikipedia.org... [6] - http://en.wikipedia.org...