The worst arguments for faith/religion/god

[Think Harder]

(Not in any particular order)

1. Respect: faith/religion deserves respect and ought to be exempt from dissection

2. Many people believe in my god, they can't all be wrong

3. My god is still believed in, and Zeus is not

4. I can hear my god, and he healed my aunt who had cancer

5. Religion produces art

6. Theistic evolution: "It's all creationism, i.e. god > no it's not, it's evolution > oh right right, but evolution is also god

7. Design: You will notice the human nose is perfectly made to wear glasses - Voltaire

[Think Harder]

Oh and add your own !

[SoylentGreen]

God wants you to give me money.

[Maryjane]

You can't be moral without believing in god.

[DoctorBarber]

You can't be moral without believing in god.

Anyone can be moral as long as they come up with their own opinion of what being moral means.

[Maryjane]

Anyone can be moral as long as they come up with their own opinion of what being moral means.

Which often depends on which cherry picked version of the bible they read.

[DoctorBarber]

Which often depends on which cherry picked version of the bible they read.

Or which cherry picked pieces of science people choose to believe in. Like how some people immediately accept science when it says that homosexuality is genetic but quickly deny any science that says faith or religion is.

[SoylentGreen]

Or which cherry picked pieces of science people choose to believe in. Like how some people immediately accept science when it says that homosexuality is genetic but quickly deny any science that says faith or religion is.

there is a science that says faith and religion is genetic?

[ChimneySweep]

There are hundreds of reasons to believe in god's existance. You just have to use a bit of algebra:

(1) I define God to be X.
(2) Since I can conceive of X, X must exist.
(3) Therefore, God exists.

Hundreds of Proofs of God’s Existence

Dr Barber: Like how some people immediately accept science when it says that homosexuality is genetic but quickly deny any science that says faith or religion is.

The God gene hypothesis proposes that human beings inherit a set of genes that predisposes them to believe in a higher power. The idea has been postulated by geneticist Dean Hamer, the director of the Gene Structure and Regulation Unit at the U.S. National Cancer Institute, who has written a book on the subject titled, The God Gene: How Faith is Hardwired into our Genes.

The God gene hypothesis is based on a combination of behavioral genetic, neurobiological and psychological studies. The major arguments of the theory are: (1) spirituality can be quantified by psychometric measurements; (2) the underlying tendency to spirituality is partially heritable; (3) part of this heritability can be attributed to the gene VMAT2[1]; (4) this gene acts by altering monoamine levels; and (5) spirituality arises in a population because spiritual individuals are favored by natural selection. However, a number of scientists and researchers are highly critical of this theory; Carl Zimmer, writing in Scientific American, questions why "Hamer rushed into print with this book before publishing his results in a credible scientific journal."[2] In his book, Hamer backs away from the title and main hypotheses by saying "Just because spirituality is partly genetic doesn't mean it is hardwired."[3

Source:Wikipedia, which requires it's own kind of faith.

[FriedrichSeneca]

From Spinoza's Ethics: God is perfect, perfection implies existence, therefore God must exist.

I do agree with him, but you must remember that God is Nature and Perfection is Reality, according to Spinoza.

Actually it's an ontological argument.

[Cephus]

From Spinoza's Ethics: God is perfect, perfection implies existence, therefore God must exist.

I do agree with him, but you must remember that God is Nature and Perfection is Reality, according to Spinoza.

Actually it's an ontological argument.

Which fails miserably because I can easily come up with a version of "god" that is much, much, much better than the Christian version, therefore "God" is no longer perfect and therefore, fails the test.

Of course, the ontological argument is ridiculous on it's face, just because you can imagine something doesn't make it so. I can imagine a flying car that gets a million miles to the gallon, runs on water and is utterly indestructible. So where is that car? It doesn't exist.

These arguments are made by people who never bothered to think about them very critically.

[Angry Citizen]

From Spinoza's Ethics: God is perfect, perfection implies existence, therefore God must exist.

Bullshit. If God is the epitome of perfection, then perfection really is managing to do all the shit in the Bible while still not managing to exist at all.

Like how some people immediately accept science when it says that homosexuality is genetic but quickly deny any science that says faith or religion is.

I fully support the idea that God and religion are inherited traits. However, that simply makes God and religion explainable through natural means, which promptly disposes of the mythology in favor of a neurological/psychological approach towards the myth.