I have been chatting about god with my girlfriend and suddenly out of discussion this though came to me like a thunder :)

I do not know if anyone ever formed it like this but it seems perfectly logical to me, obvious and is devastating to any religious arguments:

Proof that god does not exist:
>>>
An almighty being does not need to test in any way it's creations as it already know the outcome of this test, a fact that in present situation on the world is eliminating the idea that god is almighty. Without the god being almighty the whole idea has no sense which is a proof that god does not exist.
<

I would like to see some thought on how one can confront this thesis so I can prepare a more perfect version :)

Views: 21

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Um, you might need to reword that second sentence, the one that starts with "a face that"...umm, yeah, I can't make sense of what you're trying to say there. Maybe it's me......
No,it is not just you...The sentence structure is pretty garbled. Do try again.
1) It seems to me that you're confusing almighty and all-knowing. Of course you could still argue that almighty implies all-knowing, but some might disagree.

2) You assume that 'god', your almighty being, tests its creations. This assumption narrows your argument to a class of gods who allegedly do this, like the god from the Bible.

3) There's indeed a contradiction in the fact that an almighty (all-knowing) god has to test its creations (unless it does that for other reasons than learning from the outcome of the tests, but we'll discard this consideration for the sake of simplicity). From that you can only conclude that (a) god isn't almighty (all-knowing) or (b) god doesn't test its creations (ie, the Bible, or whoever claims testing from god occurs, is wrong on that point). Or both.

Bottom line: this isn't a valid proof for the inexistence of god. This isn't even proof of the inexistence of a Yahveh-like god.
I take the position that trying to disprove a myth is a futile. I'd no more offer a logical argument as evidence for no god/s, than I would for no vampires or no faeries.

At best you are espousing a mental exercise. As a "proof" it holds no validity againt a faith based belief / fiction since:
"Who are we to know God's mind." and/or
"God works in strange and mysterious ways." and/or
"God has not revealed his entire plan to us." ... will always result in a stalemate, since fictional beings are exempt from being dispelled by logic.

Hump
http://atheistcamel.blogspot.com/
I'm doing some research on the historical Jesus and coming up pretty empty handed when it comes to any ancient documentes that can confirm his existence. Only in the bible is he talked about. This myth can be disproven because Christians claim that he actually existed. I feel that it is imperative that all of us that are aware of this fact launch a concerted effort to correct this lie, which can be disproven with facts. Judd Glenn just sent me a great video called The god Who Wasn't There. It's available on Youtube.
It's solid, dude. It's not persuasive in it's current form, however.

RSS

Support Atheist Nexus

Donate Today

Donate

 

Help Nexus When You Buy From Amazon

Amazon

 

© 2014   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service