What is the best argument against the existence of God?

Question

I don't care if you believe in God, I just want to know what you think the best argument you've heard against his existence. For the sake of this question, assume that God is:
1. Eternal, or at least as old as the universe
2. Omnipresent, or at least capable of being many places at once
3. Omnipotent, or so powerful that we wouldn't understand his limitaions
4. Sensient (no Hagelian "Geist", I mean a god that knows he exists and that he is God.)
5. Purposeful.
6. Not "created" or "evolved" or other things that would make him just a better version of us.

I am also asking the opposite question, and I would appreciate people answering both questions.

I actually asked the opposite question as a different question:
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Ag.2XwmaMxhO4elIql.fKDrsy6IX?qid=20060710180340AAKJGw5

So there is 10 points available for both answers if you answer the question in both places!

Answer 1

Probably the best argument against God goes something like as follows:

Defenders of a good, all powerful, and all knowing God have to explain why two kinds of evil exist, not just one. The two kinds are chosen evil (rape, torture, murder, etc.) and unchosen evil (diseases, natural disasters, etc.).

First they will say chosen evil must exist so that we can have free will. Okay, let's allow them that. Score a point for their God.

Next they will say that unchosen evil must exist so that we can appreciate the good - that good cannot exist except in contrast with evil. There are two things wrong with that answer. First, it admits that God is incapable of creating a world in which good is absolute (non-relative). Second, even if we allow them the claim that good must be relative to evil, the question remains why *so very much* evil is necessary to make us appreciate the good. To say that there needs to be as much unchosen evil in the world as there is so that we can recognize and appreciate the good is like saying that we could not tell the difference between black and white in a picture unless at least half the picture was black.

As a last resort, they will say evil does not exist - that what seems an evil is only an absence of good. This is like saying that there is no black paint on the canvas, there is only an absence of white paint - accepting it as an answer requires one to wilfully insult one's own intelligence.

This is called The Problem of Evil.

Another argument con God:

God has perfect knowledge, which must include knowledge of all that is going to occur in the world He created. Yet we, His creatures, are claimed to have free will, the ability to choose whether or not we will do something. But it cannot be possible that we have free will if our creator made us while having complete foreknowledge of all that we will do. It is not possible because there could not be such knowledge unless all our behaviour is pre-determined, and if all our behaviour is pre-determined we do not have free will. Therefore, such a God does not exist.

This is called The Problem of God's Foreknowledge.

Finally, look at what's involved in theism (that is, belief in God). We assume that because the world contains persons the origin of the world must be some kind of person (whom we call call God) - but that does not follow. Granted that the world developed or evolved from some fundamental set of principles, and that process gave rise to persons, it does not follow that the original principles were laid down by a Person (God). There might be a God, but that God is or was a Person is an unwarranted assumption. And a grossly arrogant one.

Answer 2

Arguments Against God

Answer 3

Very simply, it is the "argument from evil". The simplest form of the argument goes like this:

1. If God is omnipotent, then he has the power to prevent evil.
2. If Good is omnibenevolvent (all Good), then he has the will to prevent evil.
3. Evil exists.
4. Therefore, either God is not omnipotent or he is not omnibenevolent.
5. But by definition God is omnipotent AND omnibenevolent.
6. Therefore, there is no God.

Many attempts have been made to refute this argument, but none of them work. Some people tried to deny that Evil exists. Fat chance!

Some denied that there was any evil except human evil, but that God 'permits' human evil because of free will. Apart from all the problems of free will this introduces (God could have made us so that we were at least tempted to do good instead of evil), you still have an argument from suffering through disease, natural disaster, chance accidents, injury, deformity, etc.; which is enough to bring about God's downfall.

Some have argued that God is not omnibenevolent; that all the suffering, deformity, etc. is either deserved or part of God's inscrutible, mysterious 'plan'. These replies won't work. The fact that there is undeserved suffering is plain, and requires no elaborate, subtle or intricate explanation. The saying "God works in mysterious ways" is just a cop-out. It is like insisting, "I'm still gonna believe in God no matter what the evidence is." Mysterious ways are superstitions, plain and simple.

Answer 4

I wish that the questioner had phrased the question as: What is the best argument for, or against, the existence of God? so that all the answers could be together in one place. There are two sub-questions of interest, which I will address in turn:
1. Did a God create the universe at the Big Bang, and define the rules by which it works? This one is unanswerable: there is no data available, and neither the affirmative claim nor the negative claim can be demonstrated in any way. Therefore, we can draw no conclusion, and our lives will be completely unaffected as a result.
2. Is there a God which is tinkering with the universe now, to influence the outcome of human events? There is absolutely no evidence to support such a conclusion (and plenty of evidence against it -- e.g., the laws of physics, which admit of no such tinkering are valid throughout the universe); moreover, there is no way to demonstrate that there is not. This latter point means that any claim of the affirmative conveys no information: it can predict nothing. Hence the question is only of philosophical interest.
There will be some who read this and claim: But the Bible says .... To any such person, I can only say, any book which contains dozens of internal contradictions, and hundreds of discrepancies with known fact, can hardly be considered a reliable guide to much of anything.

Answer 5

RE:
What is the best argument against the existence of God?
I don't care if you believe in God, I just want to know what you think the best argument you've heard against his existence. For the sake of this question, assume that God is:
1. Eternal, or at least as old as the universe
2. Omnipresent, or at least capable of being many places at...

Answer 6

Can God create a rock that he can't carry? If you know the bible, you probably just smirked.

If he can, he can't carry the rock. If he can't, he can't make the rock. If he can but simply doesn't, he still can't carry the rock. this proves omnipotence false.

Can God create a universe where he is not present? If he can, he isn't omnipresent. If he can't, he is not omnipotent. If he can but hasn't, since the bible says he "IS" omnipresent, then he is not timeless and spaceless, because an example of time, as in present tense, applys to him.

If God can not be understood entirely, why are you able to understand God being omnipotent. God has no image, therefore he didn't create humans in his image. God sounds like a particle, if you think about it. He is everywhere, and can do anything. I believe brain cells (which have your imagination, i.e God) have particles in them?

The first testament held the ten commandments, but they were coincidentally "not" misinterpreted. If "The proof of God is in the bible, it says it is Gods word therefore it is Gods word." The first testament said the same, but Christians are able to refute it. Before the bible, morals were normal. As society adapts so does this "God", and before you say God can not adapt because he is already perfect, that means God is not perfect because he can't adapt, and therefore is not omnipotent.

As I was saying, God adapts to society, first slavery was okay, and blacks banned from the church as well. Coincidentally God changed his mind, if God changed his mind then he could have prevented the mishap of this situation, because he can predict himself. (omnipotence.) And if God can change his mind, then he is not all knowing. If God can not, he is not all powerful. And if God can predict himself, then he is not spaceless and timeless. If you believe Gods word was misinterpreted, then he made the mistake of telling the people who wrote the bible for him things that would later be taken out of context. And yes, God can evolve or he isn't omnipotent, and if he can't he is still not omnipotent.


If God needs no creator, why does the "complexity of the human mind" need one? God knows everything therefore he would be vastly more complex.

This may seem like a stupid argument, but in an episode of Family Guy, Brian and Stewie go back before the universe was there, and Stewie pointed out that they are before the big bang, and this means before physics, time, etc. He said anything can happen at any moment for no reason. This, I believe, is why the big bang took place. It needs no creator, where as God does, even if this seems hypocritical. And if you think I am being hypocritical, then so are you. You criticize me for believing the thing that created us all does not need a creator, don't you think that too? But if God is spaceless and timeless, he could have created himself, making him a liar by saying he is eternal. .and he could have but couldn't have, being eternal omnipotent and omniscient, this defys creating himself. he can't create something as smart as himself, for if he can, doesn't that mean there is a second God, and that he is the exact same in his knowledge skills?


Alternate dimensions has a similar argument, and I wont get into as much detail as the God argument. All I will say is that there must be a universe with no universes, if there isn't there is no host of universes. Like everything, such as numbers there must be a host. a universe like ours with no good and no evil, if not, then how are the two/infinite universes "parallel"? Like numbers there must be a 0, without the zero it would be 3 2 1 -1 -2 -3, without the zero (the host universe) one isn't parallel because it made the illogical decision of skipping one number, and one universe must have no zero. proving it false. And one universe must have God existing, meaning God exists, but in one universe God does not exist, and is not everywhere, making him a liar. If you read this entirely, thanks. I'm in 8th Grade so sorry for my grammar. (If you find any mistakes.)

Answer 7

Foolish people! Let's just pretend that you know half of everything in the world,could it be possible in the half that you don't know ,God could exist? consider the following facts (something you wish you had,opinion which you speak is meaningless ! It's like a nose everyone has one.) Why is it in majority of movies the only name ever blasphemed is Jesus Christ. Not Allah etc and consider the year 2014 what happened 2014 years ago ,Jesus hung on a cross for you,were all the witnesses lying! BC AD timeline, the whole world lives on this timeline! Consider these FACTS, let's for argument sake pretend that the bible is 400 years old which science can confirm it's much older now bear with me, (Job 26:7) the earth free floats in space! When was the first satellite invented? (Jonah 2:5-6) mountains on ocean floors! When was the first submarine invented?Radical environmentalism foreseen, (Romans 1:25)creation rather than thee Creator, nature called mother! And naturalism is enshrined!

Answer 8

The best argument against the existence of God is the inability for their to exist a "nothing". If God created all, there would have to have been a time when there was nothing in existence. Contrary to all science we have seen, and most debate over opposites, there does not exist the possibility if a complete void in the universe or in time.

Answer 9

ok wat is to say the bible wasnt written by a crack addict? we have no proff of him existing and if he was all powerful and mad humanity and wanted ppl to belive in him how come when the native were in america they didnt even think about it until the settlers cam along ?

also u can prove the bible is wrong and im about to

there are 3 races in this world caucazoids mongalozids and negrozoids. now if adam and eve were the first humans y r there 3 races its imposibe say adam was a caucazoid and eve a mongoilde then where did negroids come from ? also it would take more then 2 ppl to populate the world and in the bible isnt there something saying u shall not **** u own blood or something like that? well then y would got make 2 ppl repopulate the world just so they could go against the bile? and where was the bible when adam and eve we on earth?

i believ we all evoulvoved from something what it was i dont know but who cares life is wat YOU make it not some god or a ******* book

Answer 10

It's just so illogical. I mean, personally, I'd love to believe in God. I just don't see how, with your given criteria of God, anyone could just be like, "Oh, yeah, no question about it."

I know there's gaps in evolution, and I'm not saying there is no God. Just, if you think about someone who's been around forever. He's always been there, infinitely. That just seems so impossible.

Lots of people say "Oh, God makes the impossible possible." But if you leave out what he can do, it makes it hard to believe that anyone or anything could ever do something like that.