Exposing the Theist

The following are three crappy (for lack of a better word) arguments made by theists, each with an exposition by yours truly.

"God exists, because the Bible says so, and the Bible is true because it's the Word of God, and God wouldn't lie."

Here, the theist assumes as a premise the very thing he's attempting to prove, namely the existence of God. The premises should lead to the conclusion, not be the conclusion.


"We create complex things, and we are complex, therefore we have a creator, and our creator is God."

This is a conjecture at best. We know that we create things because we do so all the time, and we've been doing so for many years. That is the proof. However, there's no proof that humankind has a creator, let alone that God is the creator. Also, some things are created by more than one person, such as buildings, for example. So, if we were created, we don't necessarily have just one creator. Anyway, the Theory of Evolution contradicts ID, and has evidence backing it.


"The fact that we exist is proof that God exists."

God is defined as our creator, so here the theist assumes that God must be there since we're here. However, our existence is not proof of God any more than the appearance of presents under your tree on Christmas Day is proof of Santa Claus.

Can anyone think of more?

>>4

Actually, I have had that first argument shoved down my throat by a Catholic. I just laughed in his face.

as for the other two:  God exists because we believe in him.  If he created those who believe in him(us), who created him in order for him to be believed in?