A simple challenge for atheists

[Esquilax]

It's also an amusing little piece of mechanics as as

Can be summed up to:

if miracles are possible, then miracles are possible
miracles are possible
therefore miracles are possible

-what with "god" containing a not-so-hidden assumption of an entity capable of performing miracles.

You can actually boil it down further, to:

God is the conclusion I want to reach.
An argument that gets me to god is possible.
Here is an argument for god.

Let's not pretend for a second that Steve actually cares about the premises of his argument, because if he did they'd actually be premises and not just three repetitions of his conclusion. Just like William Lane Craig's argumentation, all this is is tarting up his conclusion in the garb of argumentation, without actually doing any of the intellectual work that would require.