Arguments Against God | The Armchair Antichrist

Link HTML:

Permalink:

If you like this then please subscribe to the RSS Feed (http://feeds NULL.feedburner NULL.com/TheArmchairAntichrist) or Email Feed (http://www NULL.feedburner NULL.com/fb/a/emailverifySubmit?feedId=67ph9hkenfoe0cqvkb5f56sj1o&loc=en_US).

Powered by Bookmarkify™ (http://www NULL.bookmarkify NULL.com/)

God is Weak

On February 1, 2010, In Arguments against God, Nature of God, Religious Arguments, By The Armchair Antichrist

There is just so much mental gymnastics that religious people engage in. It really is a mystery how they handle all the cognitive dissonance so well.This time it is the claim that God cannot do something that is contrary to his nature. His nature is the basis of our morality so it is claimed that God cannot lie or sin. This is such an easily refutable statement that it is a wonder to me that why a large number of Christian debaters including William Lane Craig have used it.

If God cannot do even one thing then he cannot be all-powerful. In an effort to reinforce the ‘morality comes from God’ argument they have sacrificed one of God’s key attributes: omnipotence. Heck, if I can do two things that God cannot then I am technically more powerful than God in some regard. It seems that the concept of God is so fragile that it will fall apart at any moment.

Related to this is the claim that God is bound to the laws of logic. And this is of course to counter the paradoxes of whether God can make a rock so heavy that even he can’t lift it or whether he can make a square circle. This approach again fails miserably. Omnipotence is by definition ‘unlimited’ power. So, God cannot be limited by anything especially if he is supposedly the author of the laws of logic which is suggested by the transcendental argument (which of course also fails epicly).

First, a weak hell. Now, a weak God. What’s next?

Share this:

Close Bookmark and Share This Page

Link HTML:

Permalink:

If you like this then please subscribe to the RSS Feed (http://feeds NULL.feedburner NULL.com/TheArmchairAntichrist) or Email Feed (http://www NULL.feedburner NULL.com/fb/a/emailverifySubmit?feedId=67ph9hkenfoe0cqvkb5f56sj1o&loc=en_US).

Powered by Bookmarkify™ (http://www NULL.bookmarkify NULL.com/)

Tagged with: all powerful • christian debaters • cognitive dissonance • logic • mental gymnastics • Morality • omnipotence • transcendental argument • william lane craig

You Are Your Own God

On January 25, 2010, In Arguments Against Religion, Arguments against God, Philosophy, Religious Arguments, By The Armchair Antichrist

I hear this statement thrown around a lot by Christians who try to bring atheists, agnostics, and other freethinkers down to their level. They claim that instead of worshipping God which is oh so great, you worship yourself. Sometimes they will change it up and target your interests or hobbies (e.g. Music is your God, Gaming is your God, etc.). But, mostly they use the “You are your own God” line.

The Christians who use this think they are being clever, but really they are just bastardizing Ludwig Feuerbach’s work. In The Essence Of Christianity Feuerbach argues that religion is identical with self-consciousness, the distinctive characteristic of man which separate us from brutes. The divine trinity of human nature is Reason, Will and Love. These three things propel us towards an object which is none other than than our objective nature. Religion is merely the objectification of our own human nature which we call “God”. In religion, we simply take our human nature, objectify it, and call it “God” (e.g. “God is love”).

Therefore, God is only a projection of the ideals of humanity. Humans are the only real subject. Religion, then is a fantasy because it allows man to go beyond his own nature though it is only through imagination which conceives of a higher kind. But, in reality we cannot escape our own nature. We must embrace it and practice self-verification, self-affirmation, and self-love. Every being is perfect and infinite in their own way (perhaps he was the first motivational speakers) and has God within itself.

So, as you can see this is what it really means when you are your own God. But, don’t take it from me. Decide for yourself if this makes sense or not.

Share this:

Close Bookmark and Share This Page

Link HTML:

Permalink:

If you like this then please subscribe to the RSS Feed (http://feeds NULL.feedburner NULL.com/TheArmchairAntichrist) or Email Feed (http://www NULL.feedburner NULL.com/fb/a/emailverifySubmit?feedId=67ph9hkenfoe0cqvkb5f56sj1o&loc=en_US).

Powered by Bookmarkify™ (http://www NULL.bookmarkify NULL.com/)

Tagged with: agnostic • atheist • Christianity • feuerbach • freethinker • god • human nature • humanity • Religion • trinity

Good Old Kant

On January 12, 2010, In Arguments against God, Nature of God, Philosophy, Religion, By The Armchair Antichrist

Although Kant believed in God (not the Christian one since he was very critical of Christianity) and tried to provide logical reasons to believe in God, this excerpt from his Critique of Pure Reason illustrates some of the problems with the God concept. Specifically, it helps shed some light onto all the meaningless talk about God being outside of time, space and so on.

“If we suppose an object of a non-sensible intuition to be given, we can indeed represent it through all the predicates which are implied in the presupposition that it has none of the characteristics proper to sensible intuitions; that it is has none of the characteristics proper to sensible intuition; that it is not extended or in space, that its duration is not a time, that no change (succession of determinations in time) is to be met in it, etc. But there is no proper knowledge if I thus merely indicate what the intuition of an object is not, without being to say what it is that is contained in the intuition. For I have not then shown that the object is even so much as possible, not being in a position to given any intuition corresponding to the concept, and being able to say that our intuition is not applicable to it. But what has chiefly to be noted is this, that to such a something [in general] not a single one of all the categories be applied. We could not, for instance, apply it to the concept of substance, meaning something which can exist as subject and never as predicate. For save in so far as empirical intuition provides the instance to which to apply it, I do not know whether there can be anything that corresponds to such a form of thought.”

Share this:

Close Bookmark and Share This Page

Link HTML:

Permalink:

If you like this then please subscribe to the RSS Feed (http://feeds NULL.feedburner NULL.com/TheArmchairAntichrist) or Email Feed (http://www NULL.feedburner NULL.com/fb/a/emailverifySubmit?feedId=67ph9hkenfoe0cqvkb5f56sj1o&loc=en_US).

Powered by Bookmarkify™ (http://www NULL.bookmarkify NULL.com/)

Tagged with: christian • Christianity • god • intuition • logical • reason • space • substance • time

If I was God

On October 29, 2009, In Arguments against God, Christianity, By The Armchair Antichrist

For an omnipotent and omniscient being, the God of the bible is very poor leader. As a leader it is important to be able to have your followers follow what you say. But, even a casual glance through the bible demonstrates that God is just unable to do this. He could not get his first two human creations to obey him and eventually had to do away with the whole world’s population because of problems with disobedience.

Just like you can blame some parents for raising their kids wrong, you can blame God for sinners. Furthermore, theists like to make analogies between the biological and mechanical to reason for creation. This type of reasoning can be used in another way. You don’t blame a watch for being faulty; you blame the watchmaker for making a faulty watch. And you don’t need to destroy free will to fix this problem.

If I was God not only would I would my creations obey me, I would make the universe more just. Firstly, I wouldn’t wait until people died before I’d punish them. That is useless and solves nothing. I would punish people proportionally for each harmful act they committed. This wouldn’t be exactly like operant/instrumental conditioning which would probably destroy free will, but it would be very similar. There would be no temporal contiguity between the harmful act and punishment, but the contingency would still exist. I would select a random time within four hours of the commission of the harmful act to deliver my karmic justice.

Under my cosmic rule, people would be very quick to learn that harmful acts lead to proportionally bad results. And the world would be a better place because evil would be greatly reduced. I’m not saying my plan is perfect. There would still be natural disasters, disease and other horrible things. But, I would at least solve the problem of human to human harm and would eliminate the need for a heaven and a hell. People would do good because they know how it feels to be hurt and not for any reward.

Share this:

Close Bookmark and Share This Page

Link HTML:

Permalink:

If you like this then please subscribe to the RSS Feed (http://feeds NULL.feedburner NULL.com/TheArmchairAntichrist) or Email Feed (http://www NULL.feedburner NULL.com/fb/a/emailverifySubmit?feedId=67ph9hkenfoe0cqvkb5f56sj1o&loc=en_US).

Powered by Bookmarkify™ (http://www NULL.bookmarkify NULL.com/)

Tagged with: bible • biological • creation • heaven • hell • mechanical • natural disasters • omnipotent • omniscient • sinner • watchmaker

The Question of Evil

On October 26, 2009, In Arguments against God, Free Will, Philosophy, By The Armchair Antichrist

I will not be discussing Euthyphro’s dilemma here. Rather I will be discussing whether or not God could have created a world with no evil options while still preserving free will.

Theists will say that we do have free will. We have the choice of doing good things to help people and also evil things to harm people. They believe that the ability to do both good and evil is necessary for free will. So, they will conclude that removing evil options will also eliminate free will.

But, presuming the existence of God will lead you to the opposite answer. If you accept that God created humans in this current form you also have to accept that he has already limited us in some way. Since he is all-powerful he could have endowed us with an infinite amount of options. God could have given us options that we couldn’t even imagine. But, since we do have a limited amount of option it must have been God the creator who set those limits.

So why would further limits destroy free will when his earlier limits do not?

Share this:

Close Bookmark and Share This Page

Link HTML:

Permalink:

If you like this then please subscribe to the RSS Feed (http://feeds NULL.feedburner NULL.com/TheArmchairAntichrist) or Email Feed (http://www NULL.feedburner NULL.com/fb/a/emailverifySubmit?feedId=67ph9hkenfoe0cqvkb5f56sj1o&loc=en_US).

Powered by Bookmarkify™ (http://www NULL.bookmarkify NULL.com/)

Tagged with: all powerful • creator • dilemma • euthyphro • Free Will • god

God the Father?

On October 25, 2009, In Arguments against God, Christianity, Philosophy, By The Armchair Antichrist

God is sometimes explained by theists from the perspective of being the head of the family. He is the father of humanity and loves us all so very much. But, when you look at the evidence his parenting style goes directly against the concept of a truly loving parent.

First of all he keeps his first children in complete ignorance. Then he punishes them for a crime before they even knew what a crime was. He is just trigger happy and very quick to punish (a.k.a. kill) people. For example, the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah, the Caananites, some guy for picking up sticks, some kids for making fun of a bald guy, and at one point the entire population of the earth by way of a flood and so on.

They only way God can be seen as a parent is as a very short-tempered and overall ineffectual one. A loving human parent would try to give their children as many second chances as possible. But, there are limits to a human parent and at some point they may give up on certain children if they are just too much trouble. However, God has no limits. His power is limitless. And he loves us. So, he should have infinite patience for humanity.

If the father analogy doesn’t work for you let’s try the prison analogy instead. Think of God as the prison system and humans as criminals. According to this analogy and what it says in the Bible, God sentenced people with capital punishment for any crime large or small. But, we understand that prisons are capable of rehabilitating at least some of their inmates. So, since God loves us and is all-powerful he should be also be capable of infinite rehabilitation.

God is more fitting as a ruthless mob boss or a totalitarian dictator because as a loving parent he falls completely on his ass.

Share this:

Close Bookmark and Share This Page

Link HTML:

Permalink:

If you like this then please subscribe to the RSS Feed (http://feeds NULL.feedburner NULL.com/TheArmchairAntichrist) or Email Feed (http://www NULL.feedburner NULL.com/fb/a/emailverifySubmit?feedId=67ph9hkenfoe0cqvkb5f56sj1o&loc=en_US).

Powered by Bookmarkify™ (http://www NULL.bookmarkify NULL.com/)

Tagged with: caananites • capital punishment • dictator • gomorrah • humanity • parenting • rehabilitation • sodom • totalitarian

What is God?

On September 27, 2009, In Arguments against God, Nature of God, Philosophy, By The Armchair Antichrist

Throughout the history of humanity the term God has been tossed around very carelessly. Even today we do not have an accurate ontology for the thing that is called God. All the major religions have only succeeded in describing attributes of what their God would have. But, in philosophy it is useless to try to argue that something exists if you can’t even properly describe what it is. Some theists believe that it is beyond our human comprehension to understand such a being. In that case, it is not logical to try to reason its existence.

For example, God in the Abrahamic religions is considered to be all-powerful. But, how could you be ever sure that a being is all-powerful? At the most you could only know that a being is very powerful, but not all-powerful. Furthermore, some theists claim that God exists in a plane of existence that transcends our own time and space. But, it just might be that there is another plane of existence that transcends the one that God exists in. You could never be able to reason that the plane of existence that God exists in is the ultimate plane of existence.

This point is clearly demonstrated in the short story Flatland: A Romance of Many Dimensions by Edwin Abbott. In it, a 3-dimensional sphere takes a square out of his usual 2-D environment into the one that transcends it, the 3-D world that we all know and love. The square who before was only aware of his 2-D world became aware of the possibility of multiple dimensions each transcending the one before it.

So, in any case theists are still free to argue that their God exists, but from the examples I have shown I believe that it is impossible to have real knowledge of the existence of an infinite and all-powerful God.

Share this:

Close Bookmark and Share This Page

Link HTML:

Permalink:

If you like this then please subscribe to the RSS Feed (http://feeds NULL.feedburner NULL.com/TheArmchairAntichrist) or Email Feed (http://www NULL.feedburner NULL.com/fb/a/emailverifySubmit?feedId=67ph9hkenfoe0cqvkb5f56sj1o&loc=en_US).

Powered by Bookmarkify™ (http://www NULL.bookmarkify NULL.com/)

Tagged with: abrahamic • all powerful • dimension • humanity • infinite • ontology • Philosophy • Religion • theist • transcend

Everything from Nothing?

On September 10, 2009, In Arguments against God, Cosmology, Science, By The Armchair Antichrist

Theists often accuse atheists of believing that the universe came from nothing. I admit that we do not have any good explanation for the universe other than the Big Bang theory which only explains the expansion. But, that is no reason to turn to religious explanations. We shouldn’t even speculate in religious terms because it is not falsifiable and therefore not scientific.

Scientifically speaking it is possible for the universe’s total energy to be zero. The universe would exist in negative and positive parts. Gravity for example, is one of forces associated with the negative. When an object falls from rest (a state of zero energy), it gains kinetic energy as it falls. But, this gain in energy is balanced exactly by a larger gravitational energy as it comes closer to the Earth’s centre, so the sum of the two energies remains zero.

Furthermore, the inflationary theory of the universe tells us that only a small amount of energy was required to start the Big Bang. This small amount of energy can be explained with Quantum theory’s quantum fluctuations which occur when pairs of particles and antiparticles spontaneously form and annihilate eachother. There is a possibility that one of these quantum fluctuations lasted long enough in order to jump start the universe.

This is only a hypothesis, but it uses scientific laws and theories to arrive at it. We will never observe the birth of a universe so this may be the closest we will get to explaining the origin of the universe. So, as you can see theists the universe may have come from nothing. Inserting a god only creates more problems and begs more questions. If you think that “everything came from nothing” is unscientific think again.

Sources:
http://www.astrosociety.org/pubs/mercury/31_02/nothing.html (http://www NULL.astrosociety NULL.org/pubs/mercury/31_02/nothing NULL.html)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ImvlS8PLIo&feature=sub (http://www NULL.youtube NULL.com/watch?v=7ImvlS8PLIo&feature=sub)

Share this:

Close Bookmark and Share This Page

Link HTML:

Permalink:

If you like this then please subscribe to the RSS Feed (http://feeds NULL.feedburner NULL.com/TheArmchairAntichrist) or Email Feed (http://www NULL.feedburner NULL.com/fb/a/emailverifySubmit?feedId=67ph9hkenfoe0cqvkb5f56sj1o&loc=en_US).

Powered by Bookmarkify™ (http://www NULL.bookmarkify NULL.com/)

Tagged with: anti-religion • antimatter • Atheism • atheist • big bang • energy • falsifiable • god • god doesn't exist • gravity • kinetic • Religion • religious • Science • scientific • theism • theist • universe • zero energy

God’s Will or Free Will?

On August 16, 2009, In Arguments against God, Christianity, Free Will, Philosophy, Religion, By The Armchair Antichrist

Can free will exist in a world with God? I cannot see how. All that you have done and everything you do is part of his grand plan. If you are unable to depart from this plan and what his all-seeing eye has made real then you do not have free will. And if you are capable of doing so then God is fallible. This is a logical contradiction that has not been properly addressed by theists. It is either that God has a plan for your life or you have free will, but not both.

Furthermore, the choice God gives you whether to believe in him or not also lacks the element of free will. For one choice he promises everlasting peace and happiness, and for another everlasting pain and suffering. It seems that God is attempting to coerce you into one choice over another. Even in our mere dealings among humans, testimonies or confessions that are brought about through coercion are not considered valid in court.

To further illustrate, if a mugger comes up to you with a gun he will indeed give you two choices. Either you can give him your wallet or not give him your wallet. It is completely up to you to decide. But, for the latter choice he threatens to shoot you. Yes, this is not a perfect analogy. It was not intended to be. It was only to show you that there can be no free will when you are threatened to be punished for what you choose.

Share this:

Close Bookmark and Share This Page

Link HTML:

Permalink:

If you like this then please subscribe to the RSS Feed (http://feeds NULL.feedburner NULL.com/TheArmchairAntichrist) or Email Feed (http://www NULL.feedburner NULL.com/fb/a/emailverifySubmit?feedId=67ph9hkenfoe0cqvkb5f56sj1o&loc=en_US).

Powered by Bookmarkify™ (http://www NULL.bookmarkify NULL.com/)