Arguments against God’s existence, counterarguments, and so on…

[Blue3]

What do you all see as the biggest arguments against God, the counter-arguments, counters to the counter-arguments, and so on for as long as you think it can go?


Some I’ve heard:



1. The problem of evil: if God was all-loving/all-good, all-knowing, and all-powerful, then evil would not exist.

1a. Counter-argument: God gave us free will, so while God maybe have potential power over us, it’s not exercised absolutely over our actions (perhaps also similar to God’s knowledge, depending on the church’s stance of pre-destination).

1aa. Counter-counter: the problem of suffering, even without free will, there is still suffering inherent to the natural world (ex: disease, famine, earthquakes, floods, etc.)

1aaa. Counter-counter-counter: the scientific record of Earth is wrong, those did not exist until after Adam and Eve.

1aab. Counter-counter-counter: these natural disasters / pandemics / hunger / etc. are character-building.

1aaba. Counter-Counter-counter-counter: this is an argument of the ends justify the means, that suffering is justified if it leads to a greater good, which is evil itself and the justification of many dictators, killers, and war criminals.



2. The problem of hell: if God was all-loving/all-good, all-knowing, and all-powerful, then hell would not exist. It is infinite suffering for limited evil actions, and not justice.

2a. Hell does not exist, or it is empty.

2b. Hell exists, but it is temporary, or it is a different perspective than most think (ex: self-inflicted torture that God let’s happen, self-inflicted darkness and total separation that  God let’s happen).

2ba. This is an argument of the ends justify the means, that suffering is justified if it leads to a greater good, which is evil itself and the justification of many dictators, killers, and war criminals.

2c. Hell exists as usually understood, people are sent there for eternal suffering, and it is just. God intentionally created a universe where he knew there would be this hell and people would be sent to it,  and God still created this kind of universe anyways instead of a different kind of universe.

2ca. This is an argument of the ends justify the means, that suffering is justified if it leads to a greater good, which is evil itself and the justification of many dictators, killers, and war criminals.



3. Euthyphro’s dilemma: if God wills something because it is good, then there’s a sense of good that is greater than God; but if God determines what is good, then he can change what is good at will, and good is therefore subjective and potentially non-eternal.

3a. God and goodness are identical and unchanging.

3aa. What of the times in the Bible/Quran/etc that God changes their mind, or authorizes genocide?

3aaa. The holy book is wrong, or not meant to be literal, or not meant to actually be the voice of God.

3aab. Anything God does is good, and it was always good, and God’s actions are not applicable to the same morality as humans, God doesn’t need to obey their own laws which never applied to themself to begin with.



4. Science can explain all things that were in the past or present attributed to God, or it’s very possible to imagine things not currently explained by science becoming explainable by science.

4a. Just because God isn’t needed for an explanation, doesn’t meant God doesn’t exist.

4aa. Then the existence of God is not relevant.

4aaa. God may not be the origin or ruler, but God still determines what happens after we die, and could theoretically make a change and intervene.

4b. Science is how God accomplishes what God wills.

4ba. Then there is no afterlife.

4baa. The afterlife exists,  and it exists scientifically, it’s just not scientifically explainable yet.



5. Omnipotence paradox: a specific example of this is “can God create a rock so heavy that he cannot lift it?”

5a. Omnipotence is only about things that conform to logic.

5aa. God is not omnipotent because God must conform to the rules of logic.

5aaa. God and logic are identical and unchanging. All of God can be explained as logical, not supernatural.

5aaaa. God is just identical to nature as explained by science.



6. The “no reason” argument: if God was complete and perfect and unchanging, God would not desire to create a universe nor be able to according to the logic of eternity.

6a. God created the universe for no reason, and always did and always will, all of time is unchanging eternity.

6aa. This is not logical.

6aaa. Neither God or the universe are logical.

6aaaa. Then there is no reason to logically debate God’s existence.



7. The “solutions” to the arguments against God’s existence contradict each other sometimes.

7a. Neither God or the universe are logical.

7aa. Then there is no reason to logically debate God’s existence.




What are other arguments/counterarguments/etc. you’ve learned about, or personally thought of?