The Case Against the Existence of God

If one is an atheist, then one must logically have a case against the existence of God. It would not do merely to show that the arguments put forth FOR the existence of God are flawed. That would work for an agnostic but not an atheist. An atheist, by definition, would, I think, have to have some reason for not believing in God in addition to flaws he has noticed in arguments for the existence of God.I would, for the purposes of this argument, like to concentrate on one concept of God only. This God we can call the "God of Western Tradition." This God is all-powerful, all-good, and all-knowing. He is an ideal Being, the answer to everything. This God's thoughts are always objective, never subjective. This God's thoughts about morality, for example, are as objective as His thoughts about mathematics.Now, if one wanted to build a case against the existence of such a God, what sort of argument could one put forth?Though this topic is about disbelief, I imagine it fits into the "faith and belief" forum.This message has been edited by robinrohan, 04-05-2006 07:20 AMThis message has been edited by robinrohan, 04-05-2006 09:37 AM

One can dismiss the Bible entirely and still believe in such a God as described in the OP. Even if we ignore the Bible and just look at the nature of life generally, as containing suffering, there is a logical problem with this argument.

Here's the problem with arguing against an all-Good God, on the basis of suffering in the world.If God does not exist, then presumably our morality is subjective. And if our morality is subjective, my judgment that life involves innocent suffering and is therefore immoral on God's part would also be subjective and therefore meaningless.

OK, it's flawed. But can we come up with an argument against the existence of God other than saying He's not necessary?

---

"It is very unhappy, but too late to be helped, the discovery we have made, that we exist. That discovery is called the Fall of Man."--Emerson

There are logical problems with the concept of a pagan-style God. They always presuppose another God behind them, or else they arose from nature. Here we have a god that is truly unnecessay, even more so than Mr. Jack claimed.

What did Spinoza say? Was he an atheist?

---

"It is very unhappy, but too late to be helped, the discovery we have made, that we exist. That discovery is called the Fall of Man."--Emerson

Could you give us the attributes of this God and how He differs from the God as described in the OP?

---

"It is very unhappy, but too late to be helped, the discovery we have made, that we exist. That discovery is called the Fall of Man."--Emerson

That hardly seems satisfactory. There's lots of things that we can't see that are real. You must have some better reason for dismissing the idea with contempt.

I've heard this type of reasoning before, and it won't do. Green Lantern is a different type of entity than God (if we think of God as the creator of the universe). Green Lantern is by definition a totally extraneous entity, having arisen from nature. The concept of God is quite different.

I didn't mean you had a contempt for God, but rather for the concept and, by implication, for those who would believe such a thing. But I was just going by your tone.

So the fact that there are many different religions suggests that none are true? How so?

I had already decided, for other reasons, that we could not prove that a supposed God could not be all-good.But I was thinking of an argument we might use called the argument from the "lack of design in the universe."Just thinking about it. Not sure yet.

Translation: For practical reasons, let's pretend that life has meaning and let's pretend that our morals are real. In the short time we have on this earth, there's not a lot else we CAN do.

I didn't get all that sci-fi stuff, but if you are saying that Green Lantern created the universe, then "Green Lantern" is just another name for God. Your argument is trivial. What difference does it make about the name?This message has been edited by robinrohan, 04-06-2006 11:31 AM

I wasn't thinking along those lines, but that would be a good point. I was thinking of the accidental nature of life: Lack of design, lack of order. Existence is like a haphazard junkyard.