Why God Is Impossible

mikemiller09 asked: Is it good for God to give mankind free will?

From my atheistic perspective, that question can’t really be answered. From what we know of the typical God’s perspective, it comes down to priorities. 

For example, God wants no sin, God wants all to come to him, God wants no one to suffer… Any of that would imply free will is a bad thing as it means what God wants won’t happen. 
However, if God wants choice more than a lack of sin, (admittedly implying God doesn’t want all to believe, etc, see here), then free will would be good. 

Comes down to priorities and definitions. Which God, which interpretation? 

The Heresy Proof

wanderingforgod:

Have you ever considered that God just might pursue us the strongest through heresy?  Those brilliant arguments which seek to convince that God does not exist just might be the surest proof we have of his very existence.  

Poetic, but unlikely. Especially if the arguments against God are sound: in such a case they still need to be refuted before being claimed as evidence. 

Question: If it is true, that religion is finished and needs to be done with, then why not just drop the subject?  If God is dead, then why keep talking about him?  Why all the talk about God by people who say they do no believe in him?  Why is so much of our media filled with God talk?  Why are so many people preoccupied with the tragic side of life; the victimization of men and women and children; the revolt against religion; the cutting out of God from culture?  

We’ll drop the subject when you drop the subject. God doesn’t need to exist for theists to exist (as evidenced by the multiple, contradictory religions). When beliefs are no longer forced on children, when doctrines are no longer forced on those that don’t hold them, when people aren’t disowned or persecuted for having a different or lack of religion, when personal religious opinions are used to make laws in an area that should be unaffected by religious biases (even by the doctrines of that religion), then we’ll be more than happy to drop the subject. 
Until then, though, we’re not going to stay silent while theists force their views on everyone, especially when they have no actual basis for those views. 

Perhaps the truth is that God has no children more dear to him than those who wrestle with him and cannot let him go.  

I’d be interested to know what that says about the Christians that focus on converting other religions. 

Fine-Tuned Universe

I briefly brought up this point while discussing the argument from first cause. In that case, I explained the so-called ‘fine-tuning’ of the universe by saying that a generic cause to the universe, whatever it is, is highly unlikely to stop working, and so would result in a multiverse: multiple universes making it easily likely some would allow for life. 
Some people find a few issues with a multiverse, but they generally seem to hinge on a misunderstanding of what it actually is. 

Personally, I accept the idea of a multiverse. Let’s move past it, though: is it possible to explain the apparent fine-tuning of the universe, in a situation where this is the only universe that exists?

Read More

I’ve noticed I’ve gained a fair few theistic followers lately. Seeing as I very much doubt you’re here because you agree with what I say, this is just a reminder that I’m open to any comments you have on anything I’ve posted. 

Contents here, send in comments here or here. (Anon enabled if you don’t want to come off). 

The Origin of Life

One common argument against atheism is that there’s no way life could have come about without God. In itself, this still isn’t much of an argument: after all, there’s quite a leap from showing ‘God is a possible explanation of the origin of life’ to stating ‘God created life’ as fact. 

The main reason this argument seems to be used by believers is that they can quote many major biologists as saying that we don’t know how life came about. Accepting, for a moment, that we have no clue how life came to exist, why does this automatically point to God? There are literally infinitely possible mechanisms we might not have thought of: why does God take precedence? 

And then, of course, there’s the matter of how quoting biologists in this way is dishonest: it’s not that we don’t have any idea of how life came about, it’s that there are so many possibilities and possible mechanisms, we don’t know which one is the correct answer. Maybe none of them: that still wouldn’t point to God. 

Read More

Further response to: god-stuff:

Read More

Free Will

A response to god-stuff

Read More

Free Will

Many religions require some form of free will, the definition usually relying on some variation of 
People are able to control their own actions
Usually to allow for some kind of retributive punishment or judgement, or as a response to the problem of evil. However, this definition is impossible; something that can seem surprising at first, but is fairly simple to demonstrate. 

Read More

Note

If any followers are still hanging around, hello! 

I haven’t posted much for a while. That’s mostly down to a lack of anything to say. If there are any topics you want covered, or want to refute anything I’ve said, please send a message in! 

Otherwise, is there anything you want me to cover?

God Is Not One Thing

It’s easy to find statements of the form ‘atheists need to accept multiple assertions based on science: theists need only accept one, God, and everything falls into place’. Aside from the validity of science, it can often be used as an attempt to use Occam’s Razor: that theism is simpler than atheism, because it relies on one assumption (‘God’, though assumption is rarely the word used) whereas science is based on multiple axioms. Even ignoring the tried-and-tested nature of science, this approach is flawed. 

Read More