Apologetics,

20 Arguments Against God's Existence | Logic Test

March 18, 2019 Unknown 0 Comments



This is a response to the video published by The Atheist Voice. The aim of this article is to educate people in how to make a good sound argument and avoid illogical reasoning. What's important is everyone knowing how to discern nonfactual statements even if they look good. You don't have to be a theist or an atheist to understand that, logically speaking, the whole presentation is grabbing at straws.

1. There's no evidence for God.
In forensics, evidence is supposed to be things that the culprit left behind at the scene of the crime. What would evidence for God look like? The aftermath of someone having created the world would perhaps be... the world. A lot of people think that the order and design of nature is evidence enough.

2. God doesn't stop the evil in the world therefore he doesn't exist.
An equally valid argument is to say; God doesn't stop the evil in the world therefore he does exist. If a cop cannot hold back a shooter from using their free-will to kill innocent people dose that cop not exists? If your mother told you not to jump off a bridge, but you did anyway while your friends were doing it, does that mean you never had a mother? This is completely irrelevant but it's a very common argument people use because they are upset with the horrors of the world.

3. The global flood to destroy the inhabitants of the world is not a sign of love.
That depends on who was destroyed and who was saved. The bible says the human population was corrupted with the genetics of fallen angels and these hybrid creatures were 'cold-blooded' killers murdering everyone in sight. Only those remaining who were pure went onto the ark. The flood was salvation for the human race from a living hell; so this was very much a sign of love.

4. The opening lines of the bible are factually wrong "in the beginning God created the Heavens and the Earth" therefore God doesn't exist.
This is an example of the fallacy known as begging the question. The conclusion that God does not exist therefore he cannot have created the world is already assumed when claiming that God couldn't create the world. There hasn't been any trail of reasoning from multiple premises to a conclusion so this is not a sound logical argument.

5. Prayer has never fixed anything that was not already naturally possible.
Even if a person is already able to heal through the slow natural process of mitosis, if they were to heal a large open wound in a day it would become unnatural, and by definition a miracle.
Then he assumes that no amputee has ever had their limb grow back as the result of prayer. This is because he has seen many people in his life with missing limbs. He is barking up the wrong tree when he approaches at all the amputees in the world and asks if they have ever prayed for healing. To determine the truthfulness of this original hypothesis you actually need to ask everyone with all their limbs if they used to be an amputee.

6. There are thousands of gods you don't believe in. What makes yours any different?
I actually believe most of the gods that other people follow are real. What makes mine different is that they are created beings and Yahweh is the creator. I see it to make better sense to worship the God who can create other gods that put any faith in the others because he's more powerful.

7. Where you are born essentially determine what you believe. Why should the truth be based on geography?
Again this is begging the question. Hemant has not asked everybody in the world what they believe and plotted their responses on a map. There are plenty of people who convert from one religion to another or believe differently from their parents after they leave home. If this argument were true then we probably wouldn't even have the word 'conversion' to describe this phenomenon.

8. Who created God?
Yahweh is unlimitedly powerful which allows him to be self-sustaining. God is unchanging, which eliminates the possibility of him once being non-existent and changing to be existent.

9. Some children are born with cancer therefore God does not exist.
Cancer is caused by radiation and mutation. These things are part of the world because it's not perfect. If the argument intended is supposed to encompass the idea that God created a perfect world, and the world we have now is not perfect it would be more reasonable to say "what happened that things went so wrong?" This is more reasonable than to point a finger at God and say it's his fault because he doesn't exist.

10. Unconditional love shouldn't come with a list of conditions.
God loves people unconditionally despite their flaws and mistakes. The conditions in the bible, the 10 commandments, are not a list of requirements to receive God's love; they are the instruction for how a human can love God, should they choose to.

11. Every single supposed miracle gets debunked eventually.
How about the one that experts have been working on for two thousand years; the resurrection of Jesus Christ? The theories that supposedly debunk it have also been debunked. The swoon theory is impossible if the man really had a roman crucifixion. And the hallucination theory has been said to be a greater miracle than one person coming back from the dead.

12. The 10 commandments left off "don't rape people" and "slavery [kidnapping and forced labour] is not okay."
Actually no.7, "you shall not commit adultery," does encompass the former and no.8, "Do not steal," encompasses the latter by extension of do not steal people.
Hemant may be going off of the fact that the Israelites had their own practise of slave ownership but this is not equal to the type we know today; it was voluntary, allowed the slave to have property rights and payment, in order to pay off debt to their master and get themselves out of unemployment and therefore save their lives. It was the welfare program of the ancient world.

13. The music and movies that honour God are just awful.
This is subjective. Also true, but irrelevant. Most christian movies do not have a big budget, and the casting directors seem to be too nice to say 'please go back to acting school.' But that is an ad hominem; The people who produce Christian music and Movies are terrible at their job therefore they cannot be right when they say that God is real. This is unreasonable.

14. The invisible and the nonexistent look very much a like.
The same could be said about oort clouds and star forming regions. No one has ever seen one in action; they are theories that were hypothesised by astronomers using their imagination. But if these invisible things are not really there our galaxy would be less than a million years old and that doesn't give enough time for the current theory of evolution to have happened.

15. No hide and seek game lasts thing long.
Hemart assumes a number of things here; God is hiding, Humans could find God if God was really hiding from them, This is not the game of hide and seek that sets the record for longest game of hide and seek. All of these claims are arbitrary and the opposite is equally reasonable to suppose; God has revealed himself to certain people ie. Abraham, Jacob, Moses, and anyone who met Jesus. Humans would never find God if the unlimitedly powerful God was hiding from them. And otherwise this is the game that sets the record for longest game of hide and seek.

16. Science explains so much of what we used to attribute to a god.
Science is the observation and testing of the natural world. Scientists expect that the laws of nature like physics and biology remain constant allowing them to make predictions with some controlled variables. It should never be assumed that science can help to answer any questions about the spiritual or unnatural because miracles happen outside of those natural parameters that can be measured and tested.

17. The more we learn the less reason we have to believe in God.
The truth in this statement is a little more nuance than Hemant realises; he actually means "The more I learned about the natural world through science, the more I felt comfortable believing that God is not in it." Physicist Stephan Hawking concluded that there was a reality before the big bang in which time, space, matter and energy did not exist, and what caused these things to be 'invented' was something that is not limited to these things. Observing this dimension will never show us anything that is space-less, timeless, immaterial, and runs on a power-source other than energy, but these descriptions fit perfectly for the being we know as God.

18. If you tried to explain your religions mythology to someone who had never heard it before you would sound crazy.
This is based on the presupposition that the theology is wrong and that the person specifically believes there is no real supernatural reality that could be correctly explained.
What would happen if you were right, and the person had already experienced some supernatural encounters that they wanted an explanation for?  They would judge it to see it if makes sense to them and you would either be right or wrong, but not 'crazy'.

19. If God does not exist the world would look exactly the same way it does now.
This is begging the question again. Hemant expects that God does not exist and did not create the universe therefore whatever natural thing 'actually' created the universe would still have lead reality to be the way it is now. But the opposite claim is equally as valid; If God, the creator of the world, does not exist then the world would not exist at all. This is how much faith Hemant has in atheism; that he would risk the existence of the whole world on the claim that God isn't responsible for making the universe.

20. If God existed he would smite me right now.
On what basis, that you asked him to? In arguments 3 & 10 Hemant has already shown that he understands God is meant to be loving. If God really loves everyone like a parent loves their children, and if he has plans for our lives, would they end their life if the child asked them to? Or if they had been deviant? I good parents won't kill their children if the child screams in their face that they hate them or do not believe in them. This argument is an absolute bluff, and I call bulls**t.

Now watch the original video and see what it looks like when someone is confidently using logical fallacies. It doesn't look any different from someone who's actually being reasonable. So watch out for that when you're in conversation with people. People make arguments for things all day long and you need to be able to realise when they are using bad logic.



You Might Also Like

0 responces: