alexdore993 said:
Russel's teapot is a bad comparison. The existence of such a teapot does not explain anything (i.e. provide any answers) and certainly there is nothing to support the existance of the teapot except one man's claim. However the existance of God is not just claimed by one, but millions upon millions and it did not arise from one source, but many, which constitutes the Bible. It arose from the writings of people spread throughout the world and who witnessed miracles first hand.
That's why the Russel's teapot argument is weak, at best and does nothing to undermine one's faith in Christianity.
And yes, you'll have to explain to me why it is illogical to believe that the universe was created from nothing is logical, yet to believe that there is a God, is not.
God does not explain anything other than Godddiit.
But I'll ignore the hypocrisy in the rest of my rebuttal.
Sorry
argumentum ad numerum and appeal to the authority of the bible does does not make Russels teapot argument weak. Please if you have many sources of evidence please share them, for none have provided me with any.
The causation arguement rebuttal
1.
Contradiction
Well the 1st premise( that everything has a cause) is self-contradictory.
Ill ask what caused God.
You'll say god is the cause.
and you have just violated the 1st premise that everything is caused.
Assuming that my logic is somehow false in the above, that does not then....
2. Jumping to a conclusion of the 1st cause argument.
Assuming you have that the 1st cause argument is correct, then...err well so what? you jump to the conclusion that God is the 1st cause.
Edit the two that come to mind will provide more.