That God can or cannot be believed in ought to be enough to convince anyone of the high dubiousness of his would-be existence. (As a contrast, consider the clear meaninglessness of the following question: 'Do you believe that boys have penises and girls have vaginas?')

What happens to any reference to 'God' in The Bible if you replace it with 'Flying Spaghetti Monster'? It becomes absolute nonsense, but the logical approach as to whether or not flying spaghetti monsters exist is (and should be) the same as processes by which we answer the God question.

If I made a thread titled 'Do you believe fairies live at the bottom of your garden?' it wouldn't be taken seriously at all. Rightly so. I don't see why God should be treated any differently, when no more evidence points to his existence as it does to that of fairies.

But I guess all arguments against God are futile*, since 'faith transcends any argument on the contrary'...

* This is, in the context of this message board, probably true. I came by a useful quote recently, which makes me want to emphasise the significance of the idea of inheriting religion. Geoff's right to point out he was born and raised as a theist:

"You can't reason somebody out of a position which they did not employ reason to arrive at originally." - Jim McGinn