Philosophical arguments against the existence of God

[anonymous person]

Examples of arguments no one here has made. Of course evasiveness doesn't cast your arguments into doubt (what few you've presented), but it does lead us to question your claim of being "ready to give a defence" and your character as an apologist. A productive discussion of the arguments cannot take place when you are continually evasive. But I suspect you don't particularly care for such a discussion anyway.

Oh I do.

Like I said, you are the one who keeps engaging me. I am perfectly content not discussing anything with you if you decide to refrain from engaging me.

It is discussions like these that I actually am going to refrain from engaging in. They amount to little more than attacks on one's person, instead of one's arguments.

 

[anonymous person]

Hopefully you don't doubt that it's a developing consensus also.

I don't doubt that the consensus of atheists here is that I am ill-prepared for giving a defense for Christianity! lol.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Oh I do.

Like I said, you are the one who keeps engaging me. I am perfectly content not discussing anything with you if you decide to refrain from engaging me.

It is discussions like these that I actually am going to refrain from engaging in. They amount to little more than attacks on one's person, instead of one's arguments.

Yeah, that's kind of the point: you aren't addressing the arguments, comments, questions, etc. You're being evasive, while demanding that we engage you. If you want to sit inside an echo chamber, listening to yourself talk, then start a blog. This is a discussion forum.

 

[anonymous person]

Yeah, that's kind of the point: you aren't addressing the arguments, comments, questions, etc. You're being evasive, while demanding that we engage you. If you want to sit inside an echo chamber, listening to yourself talk, then start a blog. This is a discussion forum.

Indeed it is.

I actually have started a blog. http://www.christianforums.com/xfa-blogs/anonymous-person.379110/ I also have a website. http://www.mereapologetics.com

Check it out sometime. Let me know what you think.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Indeed it is.

I actually have started a blog. http://www.christianforums.com/xfa-blogs/anonymous-person.379110/ I also have a website. http://www.mereapologetics.com

Yes, I know you do.

Check it out sometime. Let me know what you think.

I think it's bereft of original content, and that you're here looking for an audience.

 

[anonymous person]

Yes, I know you do.

I think it's bereft of original content, and that you're here looking for an audience.

I thank you all the more for your sincere and honest critique.

 

[bhsmte]

I thank you all the more for your sincere and honest critique.

As is said; it is what it is.

 

[anonymous person]

As is said; it is what it is.

Thank you as well.

 

[bhsmte]

Thank you as well.

My pleasure.

 

[Sister_in_Christ]

Well I guess the most famous is the problem of suffering.

If God is loving why doesn't he save people from natural disasters and illness? Humans would do this, in the name of compassion if they could; God doesn't.

If God is love, why doesn't he stop rape and murder? Don't say free will. Police stopping a criminal isn't a violation of free will, it's a restriction of liberty.

If you say that God's love is significantly different from what we mean by love, why call God loving?

I'm no philosopher, but this argument easily defeats itself.

If we assume God is all-knowing, and the creator of everything, the it stands to reason He both created love and fully understands it.

In this sense, He would be like a professor 100% versed in quantum physics, trying to teach a kindergarten class. As the student, His concepts seem so irrational, and require so much more foundational knowledge, that we assume He's just speaking nonsense. When, in reality, we have such a ways to go in our education that we can't even begin to understand.

Sin exists because people wish to be free from God. This means, whether you love God or not, bad things are bound to happen. Just like when your child wants to do something on their own, and you can see it ending badly, but you stay out of it so they learn a lesson. Most would agree that a crucial part of parenting is to not shelter your children. You understand that experiencing the real world brings wisdom.

The Lord loves those whom He corrects. As we are His children, He both loves and corrects us. He allows us to go out on our own, no matter how painful the consequences. These are usually the experiences that bring us to our knees.

Now, as far as natural disasters, war, and plagues caused by God in the Old Testament, these were all disciplinary actions taken after years of warnings. Noah warned people for 100 years before the flood, but nobody wanted to believe in God. He sent nine different plagues that also proved His power as God before the final plague of taking the firstborn, and that was only the firstborn of those who deliberately chose to not show their belief by refusing to put blood on the door. Then, God even let his own people be taken into slavery and lost in the desert because they still fell away from Him. But, at the same time, He brought them out of tribulation as soon as they turned back to Him.

The wars He ordered in the OT were to wipe out horrifically evil nations. These nations would sacrifice their children, gouge out the eyes of their captives, slowly impale criminals on large poles, and practice many other tortures and sinful actions. God gave multiple warnings to repent, but they didn't. He told the Jews He wasn't giving the Promised land over to them because they were so good, it was because the inhabiting people were so bad that they had to be wiped out.

A loving God created a perfect world. Then, an evil devil convinced people it wasn't good enough. We create evil by desiring to live apart from God.

 

[anonymous person]

I'm no philosopher, but this argument easily defeats itself.

If we assume God is all-knowing, and the creator of everything, the it stands to reason He both created love and fully understands it.

In this sense, He would be like a professor 100% versed in quantum physics, trying to teach a kindergarten class. As the student, His concepts seem so irrational, and require so much more foundational knowledge, that we assume He's just speaking nonsense. When, in reality, we have such a ways to go in our education that we can't even begin to understand.

Sin exists because people wish to be free from God. This means, whether you love God or not, bad things are bound to happen. Just like when your child wants to do something on their own, and you can see it ending badly, but you stay out of it so they learn a lesson. Most would agree that a crucial part of parenting is to not shelter your children. You understand that experiencing the real world brings wisdom.

The Lord loves those whom He corrects. As we are His children, He both loves and corrects us. He allows us to go out on our own, no matter how painful the consequences. These are usually the experiences that bring us to our knees.

Now, as far as natural disasters, war, and plagues caused by God in the Old Testament, these were all disciplinary actions taken after years of warnings. Noah warned people for 100 years before the flood, but nobody wanted to believe in God. He sent nine different plagues that also proved His power as God before the final plague of taking the firstborn, and that was only the firstborn of those who deliberately chose to not show their belief by refusing to put blood on the door. Then, God even let his own people be taken into slavery and lost in the desert because they still fell away from Him. But, at the same time, He brought them out of tribulation as soon as they turned back to Him.

The wars He ordered in the OT were to wipe out horrifically evil nations. These nations would sacrifice their children, gouge out the eyes of their captives, slowly impale criminals on large poles, and practice many other tortures and sinful actions. God gave multiple warnings to repent, but they didn't. He told the Jews He wasn't giving the Promised land over to them because they were so good, it was because the inhabiting people were so bad that they had to be wiped out.

A loving God created a perfect world. Then, an evil devil convinced people it wasn't good enough. We create evil by desiring to live apart from God.

This is very true my dear sister. Thank you for this thoughtful post. And welcome to this forum, and this thread. We are delighted to have you!

 

[Sister_in_Christ]

This is very true my dear sister. Thank you for this thoughtful post. And welcome to this forum, and this thread. We are delighted to have you!

Thank you! I'm somewhat new to this, but I truly love discussions like this.

 

[anonymous person]

Thank you! I'm somewhat new to this, but I truly love discussions like this.

Awesome!

So do I.

In my talks with people, whether here or in real life, I find that often times the most common objection to Christianity is the existence of evil and suffering.

How about you? Is this something you have run into?

 

[Sister_in_Christ]

Awesome!

So do I.

In my talks with people, whether here or in real life, I find that often times the most common objection to Christianity is the existence of evil and suffering.

How about you? Is this something you have run into?

All the time! Usually, "If God were loving, He wouldn't require a woman to marry her rapist (Dinah)" Or, "If God were loving, He wouldn't have murdered everyone with a flood." Or "He wouldn't have commanded people go to war." Or my favorite, "The Jews wouldn't have done X, Y, and Z."

I find this usually comes from someone who was a Christian, lacked leadership, faced doubt, and didn't have a strong enough foundation in OT to see the love through the stories. Also, it is commonly thought that if the Jews did something, and it was recorded in the Bible, then it must have been the right thing. However, the OT basically records how poorly the Jews followed the commands of God, and the consequences that followed.

I think it boils down to most non-Christians judge Christianity based on it's followers rather than God. They assume if we follow a perfect God, we should be perfect. They use examples of evil in the OT to "prove" that since Jews were sinners, God must not be all that loving. When, in reality, all of Christianity is based on the fact that we are sinners, and can't be good without God. And even then, we are never perfect.

How about you?

 

[Davian]

Well, when I use the word God, I am using it to signify the Greatest Conceivable Being. I assumed that is how you understand the term.

When you use the word "God", it brings to my mind a character in a book named "God" that [allegedly] walked and talked in a garden that has no evidence of having existed, poofed people and animals into existence, and later, in a manner contrary to the modern understanding of genetics, populated the planet with a tiny group of individuals and animals that survived a global flood in an unbuildable boat, a flood that killed the dinosaurs in a manner that only *appears* to be 65 million years ago, because the Earth is really only somehow 6000 years old, yet remains, by every object measure to date indistinguishable from nothing, and claims of a human that may have lived 2000 years ago but for reasons you are unable to provide, is still "alive" in some manner.

Do you want to explain how you get from there to a "Greatest Conceivable Being"?

 

[Davian]

You can't prove the veridicality of your senses through empirical means.

Why not? Neuroscience is already doing that.

Philosopher Dan Dennett makes a compelling argument that not only don't we understand our own consciousness, but that half the time our brains are actively fooling us.

That was my point. You have faith, i.e. a firm and justified trust in them without being able to see or check or test or prove they are reliable.

That's all.

I have no such faith.

 

[Davian]

Yes. It is a very good article.

Does it answer any of those questions that you repeatedly dodge here?

 

[anonymous person]

All the time! Usually, "If God were loving, He wouldn't require a woman to marry her rapist (Dinah)"

Ahh, yes. I do believe I debated a gentleman on this very issue some time ago.

Or, "If God were loving, He wouldn't have murdered everyone with a flood."

Sounds familiar...

Or "He wouldn't have commanded people go to war." Or my favorite, "The Jews wouldn't have done X, Y, and Z."

Paul Copan wrote an excellent book covering all the above entitled Is God a Moral Monster? Great book.

I find this usually comes from someone who was a Christian, lacked leadership, faced doubt, and didn't have a strong enough foundation in OT to see the love through the stories. Also, it is commonly thought that if the Jews did something, and it was recorded in the Bible, then it must have been the right thing. However, the OT basically records how poorly the Jews followed the commands of God, and the consequences that followed.

Indeed. The book of Judges highlights this very well.

I think it boils down to most non-Christians judge Christianity based on it's followers rather than God.

I think this is a good point that should serve to convict us that we do fail to live as Christ would have us live. Good point!

They assume if we follow a perfect God, we should be perfect. They use examples of evil in the OT to "prove" that since Jews were sinners, God must not be all that loving. When, in reality, all of Christianity is based on the fact that we are sinners, and can't be good without God. And even then, we are never perfect.

How about you?

I have talked with many different people who all have their own reasons for rejecting Christianity. Most tell me that they reject it because of a lack of evidence for the existence of God.

Recently, however, I have noticed that some hold the position that any talk of God is useless, because the word "God" cannot be coherently defined. They call themselves ignostics.

 

[Sister_in_Christ]

Ahh, yes. I do believe I debated a gentleman on this very issue some time ago.



Sounds familiar...



Paul Copan wrote an excellent book covering all the above entitled Is God a Moral Monster? Great book.



Indeed. The book of Judges highlights this very well.



I think this is a good point that should serve to convict us that we do fail to live as Christ would have us live. Good point!




I have talked with many different people who all have their own reasons for rejecting Christianity. Most tell me that they reject it because of a lack of evidence for the existence of God.

Recently, however, I have noticed that some hold the position that any talk of God is useless, because the word "God" cannot be coherently defined. They call themselves ignostics.

In a way, we cannot define God, because we can't fit Him into our understanding. That's why He defined Himself for us with the Bible. However, sadly, only those willing to listen will understand Him.

I think the driving motive behind disproving God is fear. If He is true, yet you have livestock your entire life counter to Him, He must be a scary concept. It's easier to deny your problems than face them.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Well, when I use the word God, I am using it to signify the Greatest Conceivable Being. I assumed that is how you understand the term.

No...that's not how I understand the term. Everyone defines god differently, so I try not assume anything about what people mean when they say "god".

Now, is there any way to define what a "greatest conceivable being" is...? It sounds like a nonsensical term to me...since what one finds great another person may find awful.