I want to make a response here to the initial post. I know that there has been much discussion since the start of this thread however, I feel that there is much to be said on this issue.
Religion is a tautology
Tautology – Faith itself can neither be proved nor disproved because, by its very definition, it does not require evidence or reason.
This has been a crutch for many Chrisitians for many years. However it is not necessary to rely on the same repetitive statements that have been used for so long. The argument of “is there a God” can be proven, through reason. However, many Christians are not able, or choose not to research, study or even think on these issues. But, there is as much empirical evidence for Christianity and Creation as there is for evolution. But for some reason most Christians are not willing to invest the time that many scoffers choose to pour into their research.
supported by appeals to emotion
Appeals to emotion – “I can feel a presence” “But don’t you know God loves you!” “God is love”
This is true in some churches and denominations, and not true in others. My church is not a very emotional church. Our pastors are at least seminary graduates with a Masters, if not a Doctorate degree. Our worship services are often more of a Bible study than a sermon. We are currently doing a study through the book of Proverbs, dealing in word studies in the original language. However I have attended churches where the sermons were very emotional, and worship was rooted deeply in emotionalism. Most of the time this is a personal preference and is not a characteristic of the Christian faith as a whole. Just as intellectualism is not a characteristic of the church as a whole.
appeals to consequences
Appeals to consequences – “If God doesn’t exist, where do we get our moral values from?” “If God doesn’t exist then I won’t get to live forever in an afterlife” “If God doesn’t exist, chaos will reign”
I am not sure I understand your argument here. Many sermons have been preached on the torment of hells flames. Perhaps that is part of what you are discussing here. I have also heard many arguments on the ten commandments being used as the foundation of most legal documents. But most of all I have heard many people argue against relative morality in favor of the moral standards found within the pages of the Bible. If that is the case then yes we use the Bible as a standard for morality. But I do not see that we use the lack of a moral standard for a foundation to our faith. Because if their is no God, then why do we need a moral standard. Aleitser Crowley’s Satanic Laws would nicely suffice, “Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law; Love is the law; love under will.”
If there was no God and no absolutes, then if we all do what we want to do, and we all love each other, then we would have no need for any other law.
and arguments from ignorance
Arguments from ignorance – “We can’t explain consciousness/evolution/what happened before the big bang, therefore God did it”
Like I said earlier, there is as much. if not more empirical evidence for creation as evolution. We cannot explain much of anything on our own, but the scripture provides as good of an account of those events as any other source.
I would be than happy to debate you on these issues, however that would take this thread off course, and we are not in the debates forums anyway.