Wow there sure are a lot threads on these forums of the nature of ..
"If materialism is true, materialist's brains would be made of sawdust."
"If naturalism is true, naturalists can't help but babble incoherently as they swing through the trees."
"If evolutions is true, Darwin must be a monkey's uncle."
"If atheism is true, then atheists must not know whether to kill their kids or copulate with them first."
Isn't this a little over done? Gawd knows we hear this sort of thing all the time from hit and run theists over at AtheistForums.org and, trust me, no one is amused or impressed.
Is there something wrong with critiquing materialism via reductio ad absurdum reasoning? How come on the relatively rare occasions that theists go on the attack during philosophical debate is it so often presented as inappropriate? There's nothing being over done here.
Here are some examples of the kind of things that theists hear ALL the time:
Well I feel it is idiocy which ever side does it and call it out wherever I see it, whoever may be doing it. Let me take your examples one by one and see which I find objectionable.
"Most wars were caused by religion."
Gross over generalization. I object.
"If God is all good and all powerful then why is there evil in the world?"
Ignores the possibility that leaving evil in the world isn't a necessary evil for the greater good, not to mention the alleged omni-powers are greatly exaggerated. Object.
"If God commanded that rape for fun was good, would theists obey?"
It may not be the most irenic tact to take but the criticism is fair. Ultimately, for a Christian, which is the greater imperative? To obey God's will or to obey one's conscience - specifically when the two do not align. This bothers me because to my mind your God would greatly prefer you honor your own moral values while hoping you eventually come to embrace His. I think He would place a greater value on your growth than on your getting in line. But my reference point for what God could be is much, much different than your own.
"Atheists generally know the bible better than most Christians."
That canard might actually be true at least as often as it isn't. My impression is that the great majority of people who identify "Christian" don't dwell on the written word a great deal. (I could certainly be mistaken about this.) Anyhow, when Christians become atheists, if they're thoughtful, they probably do get inspired to pour over the bible looking for a way back in. If this one is true it only because those who do not fall away from their faith are just more comfortable and less driven to burrow in.
"There's no evidence that Jesus even existed."
Never been tempted by that one. Seems like the over-reaction of a jilted believer to me. I suspect there was a historical Jesus who probably was regarded as an enlightened teacher. I don't personally believe in miracles or anything else supernatural which are said to affect the physical world out there. However I have no problem attaching meaning to the idea of transformation on the inside and these can sometimes seem miraculous.
"Your superstitious religious text is not evidence for anything."
Overly harsh. I think "Crime and Punishment" is evidence for a great number of things. The bible read allegorically is too. But no I don't think you can use the word to prove the word. Call me old fashioned but that just seems rather circular to me.
"If God is the first cause of everything, then what caused God?"
Seems like a good point to me. I can attach no meaning to a creator god who makes everything from nothing. I'm tolerant enough of people disagreeing with me on this. I have no deeply felt beliefs about the origins of the cosmos. For me that is a deep mystery, as it is for you too even if you point to an intermediary in God who you say did it all. How and why remain mysterious unless you choose to believe that the bible is that very same creator God's galactic reference book for man.
"A belief can only be rational if it is based on scientific evidence."
Absurd. Science has no way of measuring what is in mens hearts. However not all beliefs need be rational to be actionable. And the scientific method remains the very best means of determining which claims regarding the empirical world most merit belief.
"How can anyone believe in Jesus yet vote Republican?"
Excellent point. Must have something to do with our corrupted and unavoidably sinful nature I assume. Damn that Adam. *rolls eyes*
"But quantum physics makes no sense, so your argument is invalid."
Utter fecal matter.