Apologist Accidentally Disproves His God?!?

Today, Father Casey of Breaking in the Habit goes over what he considers to be proof of god...and accidentally stumbles his way into proving that the god that he believes in doesn't exist.

Cards:
Evil Is Christianity's Greatest Strength?!?:
According To Matt Powell, Piles of Things are IMPOSSIBLE!:

Sources:

All my various links can be found here:

Mailing Address:
Viced Rhino
PO Box 343
Fort Erie, Ontario, Canada
L2A 5N1

Federal law allows citizens to reproduce, distribute, or exhibit portions of copyrighted motion pictures, video tapes, or video discs under certain circumstances without authorization of the copyright holder. This infringement of copyright is called “Fair Use” and is allowed for purposes of criticism, news reporting, teaching, and parody.

[Finckelstein]

Ah yes, Father Casey. The guy who very, very quietly dropped his YT partner Friar Tuttle after he got canned by his ministry for SA. Who only 2 weeks after that happened, also released a "Why people are leaving christianity" video that, for some toootally inexplicable reason never brought up the #1 reason why people are leaving catholicism over here in Europe - SA of minors by christian clergy.

Of course he's not to blame for the actions of Friar Tuttle. But he IS to blame for continuing the age old catholic tradition of sweeping SA under the rug.

[iluvtacos]

Opening with "there's no scientific proof for God" and ending with "you gotta have faith first" is a move.

[Chrismas]

"Those are some long odds" says the guy positing magic as the explanation

[ben]

The very idea of Lisa the Rainbow Giraffe (leaf be upon her) necessitates the existence of Lisa the Rainbow Giraffe (leaf be upon her).

[EmeraldEmsiron]

"Those who have recieved the 'gift of faith'" as a phrase immediately implies that god is willingly sending to people to hell, immediately disbarring him from being all loving.

[Rhewin]

I’ve genuinely never understood why an infinite regress must be ruled out, but an infinite, eternal being is fine.

[milohilltop]

"The only explanation is..." is a very bold, even arrogant, phrase.

[lisaboban]

I've been a reader and watcher of science fiction for 50 years. I can imagine all sorts of things, many of which I really really want to be true.
Those things are no more "real" than St. Anselm's god.

[AmandaTroutman]

Anecdote regarding morality in social species:
I have a flock of chickens, the Wocka Flocka: Part II (Part one got fox murdered).
In WF:2, I had a rooster, Debo (RIP; Got coyote'd) and 3 Ratchet Hoes (Hens rescued from a friend of a friend). One morning, one of our smaller hens Rusty was found seriously injured around her cloaca and she later died. An unnamed hen was then found brutally murdered the next morning. The coop is SUPER secure...the murderer was inside the coop. Later, I saw Debo and Hennifer, the our black Ratchet Hoe, tussling with Debo, our Brahma roo. He relentlessly was going after Hennifer. Naturally, we thought Debo was the problem. We separated him for a bit, tried to reintroduce him but he attacked Hennifer so brutally we had to separate her. Now... no other murders happened when one or the other was gone. Hennifer started a weird behavior of crowing during her isolation but we thought she was just lonely...so we tried to reintroduce her after a week or so....Debo. Hated. Her. On. Sight.
So I took him out, put Hennifer in and BAM!!! She immediately started bullying the other hens and Debo, in my arms, was losing his mind. That's when I dawned on me.
Hennifer was the ALLEGED murderer and Debo wanted to protect the flock from her.
Later she got abducted by a predator and peace restored completely.

So...Chickens are social. They're also hierarchical and those hierarchies can change over time. Roosters are flock protectors. When Hennifer started to Game of Thrones her way to the top, Debo came down on her like a Valerian Dragon. Give that all a few million years and larger brains and I'm pretty sure chicken law would condemn murder. Not because of a god but because murdering members of the flock weakens the flock. A murderer in the flock is a danger to every other member of the flock.

I could also go into the morality of rape using WF:2 but this anecdote is long enough. Unless I am the chicken deity, but I'm also a tangible, knowable deity with a definite origin and am but one of many. Anyway we have a new rooster, brahma, named Money Mike and I think he's going to eliminate Crux when he's big enough because she's being real aggressive lately...

Thank you for coming to my Hen:Talk.

[SandroWalach]

"Everything needs a cause."
"What caused god?"
"Not everything needs a cause."
"…"

[heethanthen]

At this point I can practically recite the low-bar-Bill soliloquy as well as the infamous Matt Powell compilation line for line.

[ArnoBlumel-wjkj]

The ontological "argument" always reminds me of me as a kid trying to imagine a superhero who's power it is to manifest themselves into reality from my imagination.

[susansteinkraus]

People who spout the First Cause argument always claim it's their god who created everything. They never seem to address the issue of how we can determine which one, if any, it was.

[timothymulholland]

In 1968 I was a sophomore at a Christian college in my first philosophy course. When Aquinas' "definitive proofs' were presented, I started my journey out.

[BunnySMG]

"And it's not just things I see lying around, I swear."
*mentions butt plug immediately after*

[gmicaro]

A pizza that never ends is necessarily better than a pizza that ends. And an infinite pizza that exists is greater than an infinite pizza that doesn't exist. Therefore, the infinite pizza exists.

[Soapy-chan]

the watchmaker argument is the worst.
We see a watch, compare it to everything around it, conclude it must have been designed, therefore everything around the designed object we used to distinguish between design and non-design, IS designed. GENIUS!

[sparrowthesissy]

This one was pretty damn thorough. He gave most of their most popular arguments, and admits they aren't logical enough to actually convince anyone who hasn't already accepted that conclusion for illogical reasons. And what he did present, you dismantled excellently. I don't even think he'll try to rebut this one.

[kopd]

You have to love how he glosses over the fact that he said “if” at the beginning of the ontological argument. “IF God exists, it would be the greatest blabbity blab therefore God.” Yeah, but if it doesn’t exist then it doesn’t have to be greater than the image in your head.

[lnsflare]

22:35 And it should be noted that Saul kept those animals alive specifically so that he could ritualistically sacrifice them to honor God.