Over 300 PROOFS of the existence of GOD!!!!!!

I write quite a bit about religion, atheism and various related issues so it’s only natural that my site would attract more than the usual attention from overly religious folks who feel the need to try and show me the error of my ways. I don’t mind that all that much, though it does get rather boring hearing the same old arguments over and over again as to why God(s) exist from people who don’t seem to know that dictionaries exist or what “punctuation” means. Occasionally someone will come along who at least knows how to use a spell checker and makes a moderate attempt at punctuation and I get my hopes up that maybe I’ll hear a new take on the old God argument only to be let down when they fall back into the same old points all over again.

So while I was browsing FARK this afternoon I was surprised to see a link to the following website: Three Hundred Proofs of God’s Existence!

Three hundred proofs? Hot damn! Surely there has to be at least a couple of new ideas to chew on out of 300 proofs, right? Turns out this is actually a bit of humor from the folks at the Atheists of Silicon Valley website where they’ve taken a shit-load of common Theist’s arguments and boiled them down to very short summaries such as:

(1) There is a website that successfully argues for the existence of God.
(2) Here is the URL.
(3) Therefore, God exists.

(1) Flabble glurk zoom boink blubba snurgleschnortz ping!
(2) No one has ever refuted (1).
(3) Therefore, God exists.

(1) Telling people that God exists makes me filthy rich.
(2) Therefore, God exists.

While some of them are simply silly, there’s a lot of surprisingly accurate summaries of actual arguments used by Theists in among the mix and it makes for some hilarious reading. I’m tempted to take the list and recreate it here with check boxes so that Theists can just show up, check off whichever argument they would normally waste hours trying to type in without spelling a single word correctly and when they hit submit it would email me their argument and I can laugh at it and go back to playing video games. It’d save us both a lot of time.

70 thoughts on “Over 300 PROOFS of the existence of GOD!!!!!!

  1. I love the site, very good work.
    Two words for you all:
    OPEN MIND.  Have an open mind, and before you say you do, make sure you KNOW what an open mind is.  You have to understand what people say BEFORE you make judgement. 
    And of course, you could be wrong, we all could be.  You could be wrong, and do NOT be afraid of that possibility.

  2. I’m really getting tired of folks telling me to have an open mind. Especially when they are first time commenters who don’t know enough about me to have a proper clue about how open minded I might actually be.

    The irony of being told that I have to understand what people say BEFORE I make judgment from someone who obviously hasn’t followed his own advice is just stunning.

  3. NOO, I’m not telling you to have an open mind, I’m just posting so that anyone reading it who doesn’t gets a clue.  Sorry.

  4. Hi Les,

    I found your site while looking for one of those unanswerable questions. The search had the word ‘moron’ in it.

    Thanks, it has been an entertaining two and half pages. My thinking on religions is agnostic rather than atheistic.

    I think I have come close to seeing all 14 (I think its 14) fallacious arguments in one place, other than in a text book.

    As I am having the privilege this year of failing Philosophy, I have some comments and queries…

    For all the comments on the existence of God/god and moral virtue or morality… There are no references (rather I didn’t see any) to Kant’s Moral philosophy nor the Ontological argument.

    For what it’s worth… Here is a thought on the usefulness of the Bible. This comes of my (maybe not so) unique perspective… It’s a damn good collection of metaphors. One that I remember off-the-top of my head is the thing about not trying to remove the speck from your brother’s eye while you have a log in yours. For me this has little to do with vision and more to do with beliefs. For with a singular strong belief Th log in my eye) impairing my ability to be objective, how could I begin to conceive/understand/consider even whether your opinions/beliefs/attitudes(the speck in your eye) are relevant/subjective/objective.
    I propose that we use a badly translated version of the Bible way out of context.

    I am not sure that I am making too much sense there.

    Well, here’s to a long life for your site, you and your posters. Thanks again Les.


  5. Sean: It’s a damn good collection of metaphors

    Probably how it’s intended, as a way to get people to think about issues that at the time of writing, the collective subject wouldn’t exist. Fundies must see past the literal

    For with a singular strong belief Th log in my eye) impairing my ability to be objective, how could I begin to conceive/understand/consider even whether your opinions/beliefs/attitudes(the speck in your eye) are relevant/subjective/objective

    Try to cast it to one side for a moment to be open minded, seriously consider things that contradict your bias and, if your arguement survives, use what challenged it to strengthen it, if there is conflict, develop your theories to find resolution

  6. Well, now I believe that an illiterate pedophile polygamist who advocated genocide was a TRUE prophet of God. Does that mean that we all should be illiterate pedophiles? And, how should we treat women? Does it mean we all should advocate genocide? I’m so confused!  raspberry


  7. If you try to open your eyes your confusion will vanish. You are biased. Whatever confusion you have for the personality of Prophet Muhammad (p.b.u.h) will vanish the second you start to think in a rational way, instead of a biased way.
    For one thing, the age of the prophet’s wife at the time of her marriage is not an authentic fact. Second, it was normal at that time to get married at a young age, thus avoiding chances of fornication. It is funny how people find marriage at a young age scandolous but will accept it if a young girl gets pregnant without marriage.
    About polygamy, I’m sure you are not aware that according to the Christian scriptures one can marry as many women as one wishes. It was only later, that the Christian Church restricted the number of wives to one. The Bible did not condemn polygyny. To the contrary, the Old Testament and Rabbinic writings frequently attest to the legality of polygyny. Prophet & King Solomon (p.b.u.h) is said to have 700 wives and 300 concubines (1 Kings; 11:3) Also, Prophet & King David (p.b.u.h) is said to have had many wives and concubines (2 Samuel; 5:13). The Old Testament does have some injunctions on how to distribute the property of a man among his sons from different wives (Deutronomy; 22:7). The only restriction on polygyny is a ban on taking a wife’s sister as a rival wife (Leviticus; 18:18) which is also not permissible in Islam. The Talmud advises a maximum of four wives. The Qur’an is the only religious book, that contains the phrase ‘MARRY ONLY ONE’ with instructions of justice. Polygyny is permissible to cater for different situations like more number of women in particular society or particular time due to famine, war etc, but it is not a religious obligation. People in the West look down upon polygyny, but living without marriage and extramarital affairs have been accepted by them as a norm. You need to see this too:

    And I would love an answer in your opinion to how prophet Muhammad (p.b.u.h) knew all those scientific facts if he was not a prophet?

  8. And I would love an answer in your opinion to how prophet Muhammad (p.b.u.h) knew all those scientific facts if he was not a prophet?

    He did not know any scientific facts.

  9. Interesting how you jumped from Canada to China in terms of your IP address there, San. I’m beginning to think you’re a spammer.

    And what Julian said. Muhammad didn’t know jack shit, but he told a good story.

  10. And I would love an answer in your opinion to how prophet Muhammad (p.b.u.h) knew all those scientific facts if he was not a prophet?

    For one, claiming to speak for God is a clinical disorder listed in Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, 4th Ed. by the American Psyciatric Association. In other words, Muhammed was certifiably insane and would be institutionalized for his prophesies today.

    And, for your information, he married Ayisha when she was only SIX years old, waiting until she was nine to consummate the marriage. That is just a little young by any culture standards, unless, of course, you’re a “prophet” or cult leader.


  11. Interesting how you jumped from Canada to China in terms of your IP address there, San.

    Open proxies if you ask me. I call ‘spam’ and ‘troll’.

  12. I did read it, and it is all interpretation of what Muhammed said. And, as you mentioned, he never wrote anything because he was illiterate, so it was actually heresay evidence of what someone else claimed he said. If you really want to see scientific evidence of ancients who understood the workings of the universe, please read, “Life, An Enigma, a Precious Jewel,” by Daisaku Ikeda.


  13. Leguru,
    It was not hearsay. Muhammad (p.b.u.h) dictated the Quran to his companions and they would write it down. After they wrote down each verse, they would read it out loud for Muhammad (p.b.u.h) to confirm. This process would carry on until the verse was written down in the exact way as it was revealed from God. You people are behaving like children here. I asked a simple question. How did Muhammad (p.b.u.h) know all this? I know you guys do not have an answer and that is why you have resorted to insults. All I ask is an unbiased mind while you listen to what I have to say. Is it too much to ask?

  14. Hi, I think this site is really bad~ because it does not tell anything about God’s existence

  15. I know my comment comes almost a decade too late and I’m not sure if the original poster is around to respond but I only just discovered this site.

    It’s in response to the comments of Tommy on 11 February, 2004

    “You were right, Jesus did bring in a new covonant, that is why old testament laws must be evaluated in conjunction with the new testament. ”

    When I left Christianity I could never reconcile the new teachings of Jesus and the idea of an omniscient, omnipresent God. It doesn’t add up. Why a new covenant? Didn’t God get it right the first time round? Did an all knowing God forget to include something in over 8000 years of religious guidance? Why didn’t God give us his instructions in a version so dumbed down that it would clear to all?

    If Tommy or any other theologian can help me understand this seemingly paradoxical conundrum.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.