101. Darwinists for Jesus

Comment #195815 by irate_atheist on June 18, 2008 at 9:39 pm

2. Comment #195790 by Fuller -

Darwinism V creationism is only one battle in the broader fight between reason and superstition. I can't think of much to say about this guy that's positive.

At least he's not called David Robertson. That has to count something towards his rehabilitation into rational society...

102. Oystein Elgaroy - the Christian defender who became an Atheist

Comment #195814 by irate_atheist on June 18, 2008 at 9:33 pm

162. Comment #195589 by clearthinker -

Hi Alvorin. Actually no I can't. I don't have any atheist converts. In fact I don't have any converts at all. It is only God who can convert

Hmm. If you really believed that, you wouldn't preach, write books or - in fact - even need to tell anyone about your god.

You ask people to engage with civility in the same breath as describing someone who defected from your camp as 'not of the soundest mind' (strange that you did not say that when he belonged to your faith). Is this your idea of civility?! By the way - I have no converts. That is the perogative of RD net and its 'converts corner'.

'Not of sondest mind' is a polite way of saying delusional, needy and emotionally underdeveloped. All of which epithets apply to Richard Morgan.

Philip- I'm learning. Atheism is, as I am often told on this site, simply the absence of belief in God. It is nothing else. It has no philosophical foundation, no morality, no meaning. It 'is' nothing. Just a negative.

Yep. But let's see how long you are capable of hanging on to that thought...

This of course is the key issue. But you assume too much. You assume that atheists do not behave in this way and you assume that science de facto supports atheism. Forgive me for saying this - but it ain't necessarily so. A great deal depends on what you mean by evidence.

Evidence is evidence. Anything else is pure conjecture or personal opinion. Please feel free to read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_evidence or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method. You have nothing can that pass as evidence for your stone-age cult's beliefs.

The God of the Bible. Jesus Christ. Because he is the truth. Actually I give ten reasons why I believe at the end of The Dawkins Letters. If you really want to know.

Let's look at those reasons for your delusional beliefs, shall we?

1. the creation,
2. the human mind and spirit,
3. the moral law,
4. beauty,
5. religion,
6. experience,
7. history,
8. the church,
9. the Bible,
10. and Jesus.

In turn, and in brief:

1. Lemma 1: The Universe was created
Lemma 2: The creator of the universe is an omnipotent, omniscient being
Lemma 3: This being, having created the universe continues to play a part in the development of the universe and all that is in it
Lemma 4: This being is specifically the deity of a particular sect of people living in one small section of one small planet circling around particular star out of 1011 others in one galaxy out of 1.5*1011 others.
Lemma 5:All of this is documented in a book written approximately 2000 years ago

All the lemmas need to be demonstrated in turn. Once this has been done then you may actually have some claim to the truth of your religion.

2.Argument from ignorance and personal incredulity. If you understood evolution you would not make such a preposterous statement. You may as well state that the small intestine is 'evidence' for god. This is your personal opinion and is not borne out by the facts.

3.'The moral law'. Now you really are sinking in the mire. The moral law that condemns homosexuality or the moral law that guarantees eual rights for all regardless of colour, creed, sexuality nationality etc. The moral law that demands 'an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth' or the moral law that says 'turn the other cheek' and 'forgive others'? You can't even demonstrate that there is some kind of universal moral law.

4.If you claim beauty as 'evidence' for a god then I can claim 'ugliness' or 'disease' or eight year old children dying from incurable brain tumours as evidence against a god. This is what is known as an unfounded assertion based on personal prejudice and ignorance.

5.Religion. Hmm, which one? Pantheistic, theistic or Deist? Judaism, Hindhuism or Mormonism? Perhaps you are referring to greek mythology - as it is known now. Back then it was theirreligion. Are you claiming Thor as evidence for a god? Seriously? Are you taking the piss? Study anthropolgy if you want to understand religion in it's socio-political context.

6.Experience. Are we back to your dodgy cheque writing antics again? What experience?? Please note that personal subjective experience is not evidence. Or, if it is, you have to accept that your god told Peter Sutcliffe to murder a number of women, or that Muslims who kill dozens of others - becasue Allah wants them to - are also right becasue of their 'experience'. Right now, there are 6 million children in Ethiopia in danger of severe malnutrition (UNICEF - see http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30200-1316582,00.html) but, somehow, a couple of people donating a few quid for a trip to you provides 'evidence' for an omnipotent, omnipresent, omnibenficent creator? Don't make me laugh. This piece of 'evidence' just adds to the list of things you are wilfully deluding yourself about.

7.History. Which well documented events in history would you be referring to, David? The plague? The Crusades? The Inquisition? The 9/11 atrocities? England winning the world cup in '66? You'll have to do a lot better than that, won't you?

8.The church. Which one? Yours (you know, the one you are part of splitting). The mormon church? The greek orthodox? The coptics? The People's Temple? Perhaps Hindhu temples and priests are - in your opinion - evidence for the existence of Vishnu. Care to comment?

9.The bible. Now we're heading into conclusions based on flawed premises and circular logic from our bible basher. A book so full of holes - factually, scientifically and historically - that it wouldn't even be any use as a collander. Contradictory, inaccurate and rewritten more times than a Sun headline. Please explain why you do not regard 'The Book of Mormon' as compelling evidence to support the claims of the Church of the Latter Day Saints of Jesus Christ. In fact - do it for every religion's holy books. Show us why your set of myths are so much more reliable than theirs.

10.Jesus. Can you produce this witness? In fact, can you produce any reliable verifiable evidence for his (third-hand) reported words and actions? If you can claim 'Jesus' then a billion or so Muslims can claim 'Mohammed' and as far as they're concerned, he trumps your man. The Japanese regarded Emperor Hirohito as a divine ruler and god, Tibetans claim - and believe - similarly about the Dalai Lama. Why do you put your money (or cheques, if you prefer) on your myth-man and not theirs? After all - I've met the Dalai Lama in person at the Cambridge Union Society. He looked pretty real to me. Should I worship him?

What I find fascinating here is that in the one sentence you affirm that you are not dogmatic and then in the next statement, without a blush, you dogmatically declare 'there is zero evidence'!

To demand evidence for extraordinary claims is not dogmatic. It is entirely reasonable. So far you - and your fellow delusionists - have provided no actual evidence for your outlandish claims. The burden of proof rests on you.

I actually think I greatly overestimated your interest in evidence. You have already decided there is no evidence. Most of the atheists on here start off with the presupposition that there is no God - they then justify this with a philosophical position of empiricism and logical positivism - thus enabling them to rubbish any evidence. It is the ultimate in circular argument. Intelligent people know there is no God. If someone believes in God they cannot be intelligent and any evidence they offer is automatically stupid/lying/ignorant/unscientific (delete as appropriate).

oh, good grief. I think we have already established you haven't the first idea what evidence actually is. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle believed in fairies. Are you sugggesting that because he believed iin them that we should too? If I wheel out some Hindhu scientists or Mormon lawyers who believe the tenets of their faith, why do you not suddenly say 'oh, they must be right. Their faith must be true'?

Oystein - good to hear from you and thanks for the interesting material about the fine tuning of the universe. I am most intrigued by this last sentence. How do you know what a 'natural process is? Surely if it is a natural process in this universe then that is of course precisely what it would look like. Do you accept the multi-verse theory? Do you agree with RD that you might already be dead in another universe? Or that you may exist in another one with a green moustache? What is the empirical evidence for this? Apart from mathematical equations what empirical evidence is there for the multi-verse theory?

are you now claiming to be a better scientific authority on such matters than Professor Oystein Elgaroy himself? If so, this just goes to show what an ignorant arrogant fuckwit you are. Perhaps the good Professor himself will tear you apart on your childish drivel. Once again, I say, this just goes to show what a fuckwit you really are.

On another tack - what kind of Christian were you before you converted? I apologise for just taking the article at its word without asking you. Did you believe that Jesus Christ was the Son of God, rose from the dead? Did you believe that the Bible was the Word of God?

I see, trying the old ' he wasn't a real believer approach. No True Scotsman writ large. Believe whatever rubbish you like Robertson, but don't expect us - or anyone else for that matter - to respect you for it. Your attitude too your fellow man demonstrates time and time again that you are beneath contempt.

And finally .....(please note that I will be back but only when I get the time...and I will try to be good and not respond to every point...but then I will be accused of 'quote mining'....I don't know - its so hard to meet the demands of the irrational!)

This is nothing more than a pathetic whine. One we are used to reading here.

Apathy - as I have already explained many times on this site I have no problem with evolution. I don't know enough about it but I do not see why it would make one difference to my faith.

How can you write 'I don't know enough about it but do not see why it would make one difference to my faith' with a straight face? If you don't know enough about it, how can you take a proper stance on the issue? How can you - effectivley - dismiss why it is so important? No adam. No eve. No original sin. No 'garden of eden' No talking snake. the list goes on and on and on and on...

Perhaps an African shaman could say' I don't know enough about retro-virals but I don't see why it would stop me recommending that people sleep with virgins to sure themselves of HIV/AIDS.' Is this a reasonable position to take?

In fact I have just come back from a fellowship group where one man was shocked when I told him that I did not believe in a young earth.

In which case you are spending your time with at least one uneducable imbecile. This is not surprising in the slightest.

103. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #195373 by irate_atheist on June 18, 2008 at 6:11 am

8013. Comment #195357 by Philip1978 -

Philip, I'll be thirty two then. I tend to find I immature with age.

104. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #195370 by irate_atheist on June 18, 2008 at 6:09 am

8016. Comment #195365 by Frankus1122 -

May I suggest BEEF-IA?

More BEEFY than BEEFY.

105. Oystein Elgaroy - the Christian defender who became an Atheist

Comment #195356 by irate_atheist on June 18, 2008 at 5:42 am

99. Comment #195295 by DamnDirtyApe -

I recommend looking up comments by regular posters such as Brian, Steve, Barry, Phil, Irate et al.

Hmm, not sure what information anyone would immediately get from my posts except that I am both an atheist and irate. I suppose it depends if they like the word or not.

106. Oystein Elgaroy - the Christian defender who became an Atheist

Comment #195290 by irate_atheist on June 18, 2008 at 2:35 am

92. Comment #195280 by Steve Zara -

Steve, as David Robertson is once again refusing to answer direct questions, I am hereby marking his last post as Troll. I have no intention of replying to his drivel. He can keep whinging like a toddler that keeps throwing his toys out the pram, and like the toddler, he will have to learn to behave or face reasonable consequences.

107. Oystein Elgaroy - the Christian defender who became an Atheist

Comment #195285 by irate_atheist on June 18, 2008 at 2:24 am

80. Comment #195263 by ctrkev -

Bullshitter alert:

My choice came after many years of reading, studying, and praying.

I don't know many atheists who spend years praying. Sounds more of an 'RM' than an atheist.

108. Rapture site sends unbelievers their last chance ... via email

Comment #195275 by irate_atheist on June 18, 2008 at 2:05 am

65. Comment #195272 by AllanW -

Groan.

109. Rapture site sends unbelievers their last chance ... via email

Comment #195271 by irate_atheist on June 18, 2008 at 1:56 am

63. Comment #195260 by 8teist -

Here comes the Rapture...........DUCK

The rapture duck? And here's me, thinking it was horsemen...

110. Oystein Elgaroy - the Christian defender who became an Atheist

Comment #195020 by irate_atheist on June 17, 2008 at 2:35 pm

Dear Oystein -

Welcome back to reality.

Yours faithlessly

irate_atheist

111. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #195012 by irate_atheist on June 17, 2008 at 2:25 pm

7842. Comment #194847 by hungarianelephant -

irate, further intervention needed, if you please.

*sighs* Oh, if I must.

GitForBrains - you're a wilfully ignorant, self-deluded, cretinous fucktard. That you are able to breathe in - and then out again - just goes to show just how little intelligence has to do with basic bodily functions. Speaking of bodily functions:

Have you read the papers? There has been an influx of scientists turning to Creation as the real truthful answer to life. I am talking record numbers. Either humble yourselves and admit defeat or run to the hills. Your evil ways are going to be short lived. You will be held accountable for your actions.

That has to be one of the finest dribbles of arse-gravy ever submitted to this site.

Shove your shite back up your slack rectum and, holding your cheeks with both hands to prevent spillage, stagger off to a cesspit to unload. Just make sure it's got a decent capacity, you obviously contain a huge quantity of excrement waiting to be sprayed out.

112. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #194783 by irate_atheist on June 17, 2008 at 9:10 am

7802. Comment #194762 by Jethro -

As an Evangelical Christian who finds creationism profoundly shallow, I'll stand with Richard Dawkins here, and hope that these shared values will prove to be deeply true either because reality is ultimately good and personal or because natural selection is somehow not as uncompassionate as it seems to be.

You clearly do not understand 'natural selection'.

Reality is ultimately good? WTF? You have any evidence for this statement?

Perhaps you could start by searching in Zimbabwe or Ethiopia for evidence of to support your 'reality is ultimately good' hypothesis.

Care to elaborate?

113. Saving Us from Darwin

Comment #194757 by irate_atheist on June 17, 2008 at 8:38 am

160. Comment #194737 by ketch22 -

When genesis speaks of death it speaks of spiritual death as evidenced by God telling Adam if he ate of the fruit, he would die. He didn't die, but instead experienced a spiritual death.

Bullshitter alert! Another spot your own metaphor contest.

I don't wish to be rude, but we've heard it all before, and - with respect - you can fuck off.

114. Saving Us from Darwin

Comment #194710 by irate_atheist on June 17, 2008 at 7:52 am

145. Comment #194683 by phatbat -

BTW epeeist - I've always thought ur avatar might be a famous person but never been quite sure. Someone set me straight the other day and said it was actualy you. I can't put my finger on who you look like, have you ever been told you look like someone in the public eye,

A vague resemblance, visually, to George Galloway. (Please please please don't skewer me for that. In reality you bear no resemblance whatsoever)

115. Louisiana's latest creationism bill moves to House floor

Comment #194676 by irate_atheist on June 17, 2008 at 7:08 am

Steve, epeeist - I stand by my comment #194668 on this particular know-nothing sad-sack.

116. Louisiana's latest creationism bill moves to House floor

Comment #194672 by irate_atheist on June 17, 2008 at 7:04 am

Quetz - I don't believe he has a dictionary, let alone any 'proof' of an existing deity.

117. Louisiana's latest creationism bill moves to House floor

Comment #194668 by irate_atheist on June 17, 2008 at 6:53 am

188. Comment #194666 by Shmeezers -

To which I can only respond:

Fucktard

118. Divine Impulses: Ayaan Hirsi Ali

Comment #194595 by irate_atheist on June 17, 2008 at 3:20 am

51. Comment #194574 by Fanusi Khiyal -

Sorry, RamizD, I'll just answer this bit: imagine if tomorrow all the Muslims in the world had adopted Christianity, even Bible-pounding, Pat Robertson style Christianity. Is there anyone who wouldn't heave a huge sight of relief?

Just in case you miss my answer:

I wouldn't.

119. Discussion between Richard Dawkins and Paula Kirby

Comment #194593 by irate_atheist on June 17, 2008 at 3:17 am

374. Comment #194586 by epeeist -

However, I don't think there are many here who object to private belief.

'Private beliefs' can result in 'public actions'. I'd much rather they were educated out of such nonsense thus eliminating the risk. (No - I'm not talking about Stalinist re-education.)

Again, I don't think you will find many atheists who object to religious education.

I do. I'd much rather it was titled 'Myths and legends through the ages'

OR:

'How man made all the gods'.

120. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #194591 by irate_atheist on June 17, 2008 at 3:11 am

7784. Comment #194584 by keith -

I wonder why RtG clung to religion in the first place. Could it be that it was the last resort?

Perhaps it was. But RtG's almost certainly drowning, not waving, whilst clinging on to the deflating lifebelt.

121. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #193946 by irate_atheist on June 16, 2008 at 8:29 am

7431. Comment #193940 by Philip1978 -

That's one of the most disturbing images I have ever encountered in my mind.

122. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #193937 by irate_atheist on June 16, 2008 at 8:23 am

7426. Comment #193933 by Quetzalcoatl -

Quetz - You're getting confused with his pork sword.

123. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #193914 by irate_atheist on June 16, 2008 at 8:03 am

7418. Comment #193910 by Podaar -

Irate,

You've got to admit, this one will be hard to top.

Perhaps we should start a 'Theist's challenge of the month' contest. The winner is the person that can come up with the most insane hypothesis that attempts to twist reality to fit a religious text. txpiper, it's over to you...

124. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #193904 by irate_atheist on June 16, 2008 at 7:53 am

7416. Comment #193899 by Podaar -

There's a new facepalm moment almost every day here. Sometimes we think we've heard it all before, and then another total whackjob turns up just to prove us wrong.

125. Vatican bans Dan Brown film Angels & Demons from Rome churches

Comment #193879 by irate_atheist on June 16, 2008 at 7:30 am

Like I give a shit?

126. Saving Us from Darwin

Comment #193877 by irate_atheist on June 16, 2008 at 7:26 am

87. Comment #193857 by Steve Zara -

See what I mean, people?

Indeed. Stone cold fucknuts.

127. George W Bush meets Pope amid claims he might convert to Catholicism

Comment #193852 by irate_atheist on June 16, 2008 at 6:19 am

I'd rather George W. Bush was converted to run on LPG than Catholicism.

128. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #193851 by irate_atheist on June 16, 2008 at 6:18 am

7413. Comment #193848 by phasmagigas -

in 'real life' the loons we get on here are probably not to far away from being sandwich board carrying street preachers, maybe already there.

If only that were the case...

129. Holiday in Hellmouth

Comment #193844 by irate_atheist on June 16, 2008 at 6:05 am

234. Comment #193839 by BillySands -

So within his own church he has enemies.

Whereas, within his church he actually needs enemas.

130. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #193826 by irate_atheist on June 16, 2008 at 5:10 am

7409. Comment #193821 by Steve Zara -

The problem for a flood would be to melt the ice without incinerating the Earth with the heat.

Perhaps he invented the world's first frost-free fridge-freezer.

131. Holiday in Hellmouth

Comment #193812 by irate_atheist on June 16, 2008 at 4:29 am

216. Comment #193802 by Apathy personified -

irate, billy - congratulations on being given the title of atheist spokesperson by clearthinker, please remind him of this at every opportunity.

Hell, boy, I'm not even a spokesperson for myself.

As for his, "Anyway please feel free to continue to insult and abuse.", my response is - I certainly do and I certainly will!!!!

132. Holiday in Hellmouth

Comment #193796 by irate_atheist on June 16, 2008 at 3:54 am

210. Comment #193792 by Corylus -

Perhaps he's trying the 'no true philosopher' approach.

Not true unless they say 'yes Mr Roberston, you're soooooo right, if we make certain assumptions, and ignore all real-world evidence.'

133. Holiday in Hellmouth

Comment #193791 by irate_atheist on June 16, 2008 at 3:48 am

204. Comment #193783 by Tyler Durden -

Johnny, show him what he's won!

Yer Bully tankard, set of darts and a hundred and fifty quid. Now - that's safe - do yer want ter gamble the colour television, washer dryer and set of dining room furniture for Bully's special prize?

134. Intelligent people 'less likely to believe in God'

Comment #193785 by irate_atheist on June 16, 2008 at 3:36 am

137. Comment #193753 by Vaal -

Irate

Man, you have just covered my screen in coffee. Stop it!

Stop it? What, your screen? Is it running away from the unwanted spraying? Srsly.

135. George W Bush meets Pope amid claims he might convert to Catholicism

Comment #193756 by irate_atheist on June 16, 2008 at 2:16 am

37. Comment #193580 by MPhil -

Schreiben sie langsameres bitte. Ich bin ein ausländer.

136. Intelligent people 'less likely to believe in God'

Comment #193751 by irate_atheist on June 16, 2008 at 2:04 am

124. Comment #192998 by clearthinker -

I have no wished to get involved in this particular thread...

I guess that's why you're not posting on it. Er.. hang on.

Bullshitter alert!


Aark aark aark!!!

137. As the world becomes smaller, the need to understand each other's faith grows

Comment #193354 by irate_atheist on June 15, 2008 at 12:42 pm

93. Comment #193304 by epeeist -

And there was me thinking it was the Blair Foundation for God.

As a free gift when you join you get a complementary snozzcumber.

Plus detailed instructions about where to insert it.

138. Holiday in Hellmouth

Comment #193352 by irate_atheist on June 15, 2008 at 12:40 pm

176. Comment #193328 by BillySands -

Apparently the bastards are still exempt from water charges despite a recent review

That just takes the piss!!!

(groan...)

139. Holiday in Hellmouth

Comment #193260 by irate_atheist on June 15, 2008 at 4:50 am

169. Comment #193256 by BillySands -

Spot on.

140. Holiday in Hellmouth

Comment #193252 by irate_atheist on June 15, 2008 at 4:27 am

165. Comment #193248 by Steve Zara -

Oh, Steve, we all know why this is the case. The support/non-support for evolution, the nice guy/bastard routine, the twisting of words and lying. The whining, the wheedling, the preening.

It is becasue he is a cunt.

(Quotemine that, David Robertson)

141. As the world becomes smaller, the need to understand each other's faith grows

Comment #192890 by irate_atheist on June 14, 2008 at 6:32 am

Tony Blair - you're a first-class fucktard. Please feel free to have some interfaith dialogue with the Taliban. On a one-to-one basis, as it were. Hell, I'll subsidise your (one-way) ticket if you like. (I know how much you resent having to pay for anything out of your own pocket).

142. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #192887 by irate_atheist on June 14, 2008 at 6:21 am

7152. Comment #192875 by epeeist -

As was obvious he had swallowed the pap fed to him by his pastor without thinking. One can see the pastor claiming lots of evidence for the existence of Jesus and his congregation nodding in agreement. The authoritarian nature of the arrangement ensures that they will not doubt the claim nor will they go check that it has some truth to it.

Given that - in all probability - the priest/priestess seems like a decent sort, the sheeple make the leap that they (priest/priestess) must have researched it all - in depth - so has a solid foundation for what they claim.

When one starts to look at theological writings critically, one sees that not only does the Emperor have no clothes, there is no reason to believe there is an Emperor at all...

143. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #192805 by irate_atheist on June 14, 2008 at 1:49 am

7138. Comment #192804 by Paula Kirby -

And if we reacted with hostility to someone who came in here trying to advocate Hitler as a role model, would it be because, subconsciously, we were afraid we might be secret Fascists?

Mein Fuhrer!!!! I can walk!!!!

On another note, regarding RtG, do we think he's, you know, one of them? *cough*

144. Discussion between Richard Dawkins and Paula Kirby

Comment #192511 by irate_atheist on June 13, 2008 at 8:38 am

304. Comment #192509 by al-rawandi -

Indeed. It is why he has to stand up to be heard properly.

145. Discussion between Richard Dawkins and Paula Kirby

Comment #192507 by irate_atheist on June 13, 2008 at 8:27 am

292. Comment #192463 by Vaal -

Irate, fancy debating Robertson?

No. I don't want to be arrested for 'behaviour liable to cause a breach of the peace.'

146. Fleabytes

Comment #191649 by irate_atheist on June 11, 2008 at 12:00 pm

7747. Comment #191602 by Steve Zara -

"Leave it aaaht. E ain't worf it."

To which, may I add:

"I don't care. I don't care. I don't care if 'e comes round 'ere"

147. Logical Proof of the Existence of a Divine Creator, Why Atheism is Not Logically Sound

Comment #191576 by irate_atheist on June 11, 2008 at 8:57 am

327. Comment #191572 by latsot -

This article makes me confused and angry.

It makes me weep for the future of a highly evolved species that can be so smart, yet so dumb.

148. Logical Proof of the Existence of a Divine Creator, Why Atheism is Not Logically Sound

Comment #191418 by irate_atheist on June 10, 2008 at 11:15 pm

293. Comment #191416 by delusionofthespecies -

Many thanks for posting this 'reply'. I'll just make a couple of comments before going to have breakfast/feed the cat/ go to work etc.

...all of which incorrectly assumed that the Creator is physical,...

What? As opposed to just plain non-existent?

That is a discussion that would involve much theology...

Really? Care to discuss my theory of pink unicorns as well, would you?

To the few of you who could do no more than write a few baseless insults.

Not baseless at all. We have your own writings to base them on!

Edit: Yomin Postelnik -If you're reading this blog, lets see if you can get pass these lemmata to 'prove' your god exists^*:

Lemma 1: The Universe was created
Lemma 2: The creator of the universe is an omnipotent, omniscient being
Lemma 3: This being, having created the universe continues to play a part in the development of the universe and all that is in it
Lemma 4: This being is specifically the deity of a particular sect of people living in one small section of one small planet circling around one particular star out of 10¹¹ others in one galaxy out of 1.5*10¹¹ others.
Lemma 5: All of this is documented in a book written approximately 2000 years ago

All the lemmas need to be demonstrated in turn. Once this has been done then you may actually have some claim to the truth of your religion.

* Credit to epeeist for supplying this originally.

149. Logical Proof of the Existence of a Divine Creator, Why Atheism is Not Logically Sound

Comment #191415 by irate_atheist on June 10, 2008 at 11:00 pm

Why, when I read the title of this, did I think it contained the same intellectual content as, say: Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan?

150. Storm erupts over 'virginity' divorce

Comment #191409 by irate_atheist on June 10, 2008 at 9:32 pm

1413. Comment #191408 by black wolf -

They really are scum, aren't they?

Tolerate this bullshit?

My arse!