A Simple Argument Against the Christian god's existence

Argue for and against Christianity

Moderator: Moderators

Rational Atheist
Student
Posts: 71
Joined: Fri May 29, 2020 8:00 pm
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 31 times

A Simple Argument Against the Christian god's existence

Post #1

Post by Rational Atheist »

1. If the Christian god exists, then he is all-powerful.
2. If the Christian god exists, then he wants the gospel message of Jesus spread to people throughout the world.
3. If the Christian god is all-powerful and wants the gospel spread, it follows that he would use the most efficient means to achieve this end of spreading the gospel.
4. Since the only way the gospel is spread is through human missionaries and scribes (hence why it took nearly 1500 years for Christianity to reach North America), then God is not using the most efficient means to spread the gospel.
5. Conclusion: The Christian God, as defined in premises 1 and 2, does not exist.

The only way to refute this argument is to show that premise 1 or premise 2 is false. I think that very few Christians would call premise 1 into question. Perhaps some might question premise 2, but I think that the Christian's denial of premise 2 entails nonsense when it comes to its practical implication for Christians. If premise 2 is false, it would mean that Christian missionaries who are spreading the message of the gospel around the world are working against the will of their God and, by definition, are actually sinning by telling people about Jesus. I think that very few Christians actually believe that trying to spread Christianity throughout the world is a sin, and thus, I believe premises 1 and 2 are solid, and hence the entire argument is sound. I think that this simple argument disproves the existence of the Christian God. What do you think? Is this argument persuasive to you? Do you have any critiques or suggestions as to how it could be refined? And, for Christians specifically, how would you respond to this argument?

User avatar
DrNoGods
Prodigy
Posts: 2716
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2017 2:18 pm
Location: Nevada
Has thanked: 593 times
Been thanked: 1642 times

Re: A Simple Argument Against the Christian god's existence

Post #2

Post by DrNoGods »

[Replying to Rational Atheist in post #1]
1. If the Christian god exists, then he is all-powerful.
2. If the Christian god exists, then he wants the gospel message of Jesus spread to people throughout the world.
3. If the Christian god is all-powerful and wants the gospel spread, it follows that he would use the most efficient means to achieve this end of spreading the gospel.
4. Since the only way the gospel is spread is through human missionaries and scribes (hence why it took nearly 1500 years for Christianity to reach North America), then God is not using the most efficient means to spread the gospel.
5. Conclusion: The Christian God, as defined in premises 1 and 2, does not exist.

I think that this simple argument disproves the existence of the Christian God. What do you think? Is this argument persuasive to you? Do you have any critiques or suggestions as to how it could be refined? And, for Christians specifically, how would you respond to this argument?
I'm not a Christian, but I'd say the two weakest points are #3 and #4, especially #4. For #3, this is a rational assumption but is probably not an axiom. How can it be proved that wanting the gospel spread is sufficient to conclude that the most efficient means has to therefore be used?

As for #4, for the first 1500 years (or 1800 years) what could have been more efficient than human missionaries and scribes? Until the telegraph came along in the 1830s, the written word, or oral communications, were the only options to get information to people. And both required a human to physically carry the written document to another person, or to be in their presence. I believe the first book produced with moveable type in the 1400s was the Christian bible, and these were disseminated to spread the word, but it was only in the mid-1800s that electronic transmissions (telegraph in 1830-1840) were possible, and later still before the telephone and then video could be used. So I'd argue that the most efficient means were used to spread the gospel, as every new invention was quickly used for that purpose, and still is today.

So I'm not sold on this series of arguments as a "proof." What more efficient means could have been used to spread the gospel given the technology at any given time? If #1 and #2 were givens, then the most efficient means to spread the gospel would be for this all powerful god to simply communicate the message to every human directly in some way (eg. make them hear the message in their language by creating the appropriate series of sound waves directed to their ears). Wouldn't an "all powerful" god be able to do this? And how does it follow that because he didn't do this (or something similar) he doesn't exist?
In human affairs the sources of success are ever to be found in the fountains of quick resolve and swift stroke; and it seems to be a law, inflexible and inexorable, that he who will not risk cannot win.
John Paul Jones, 1779

The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read.
Mark Twain

Rational Atheist
Student
Posts: 71
Joined: Fri May 29, 2020 8:00 pm
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 31 times

Re: A Simple Argument Against the Christian god's existence

Post #3

Post by Rational Atheist »

DrNoGods wrote: Thu Jan 07, 2021 1:49 pm [Replying to Rational Atheist in post #1]
1. If the Christian god exists, then he is all-powerful.
2. If the Christian god exists, then he wants the gospel message of Jesus spread to people throughout the world.
3. If the Christian god is all-powerful and wants the gospel spread, it follows that he would use the most efficient means to achieve this end of spreading the gospel.
4. Since the only way the gospel is spread is through human missionaries and scribes (hence why it took nearly 1500 years for Christianity to reach North America), then God is not using the most efficient means to spread the gospel.
5. Conclusion: The Christian God, as defined in premises 1 and 2, does not exist.

I think that this simple argument disproves the existence of the Christian God. What do you think? Is this argument persuasive to you? Do you have any critiques or suggestions as to how it could be refined? And, for Christians specifically, how would you respond to this argument?
I'm not a Christian, but I'd say the two weakest points are #3 and #4, especially #4. For #3, this is a rational assumption but is probably not an axiom. How can it be proved that wanting the gospel spread is sufficient to conclude that the most efficient means has to therefore be used?

As for #4, for the first 1500 years (or 1800 years) what could have been more efficient than human missionaries and scribes? Until the telegraph came along in the 1830s, the written word, or oral communications, were the only options to get information to people. And both required a human to physically carry the written document to another person, or to be in their presence. I believe the first book produced with moveable type in the 1400s was the Christian bible, and these were disseminated to spread the word, but it was only in the mid-1800s that electronic transmissions (telegraph in 1830-1840) were possible, and later still before the telephone and then video could be used. So I'd argue that the most efficient means were used to spread the gospel, as every new invention was quickly used for that purpose, and still is today.

So I'm not sold on this series of arguments as a "proof." What more efficient means could have been used to spread the gospel given the technology at any given time? If #1 and #2 were givens, then the most efficient means to spread the gospel would be for this all powerful god to simply communicate the message to every human directly in some way (eg. make them hear the message in their language by creating the appropriate series of sound waves directed to their ears). Wouldn't an "all powerful" god be able to do this? And how does it follow that because he didn't do this (or something similar) he doesn't exist?

#3 follows from the fact that if God is all powerful, he would do everything in his power to achieve his wants. Since clearly he didn't (as you point out, he could have directly communicated to every human in some way if he was all-powerful), then he doesn't exist. That's because an all-powerful god would achieve all of its wants. Think of how many people around the world died without ever hearing of Jesus. According to 2 Peter 3:9 he is "not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentence." If that's the case, and God is all powerful, he would have ensured the gospel gets to everyone without waiting for missionaries. But he didn't. So, this particular version of God (all powerful and wanting a relationship with everyone) simply does not square with the data, namely, that millions if not billions of people died without ever hearing of said god.

User avatar
DrNoGods
Prodigy
Posts: 2716
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2017 2:18 pm
Location: Nevada
Has thanked: 593 times
Been thanked: 1642 times

Re: A Simple Argument Against the Christian god's existence

Post #4

Post by DrNoGods »

[Replying to Rational Atheist in post #3]
So, this particular version of God (all powerful and wanting a relationship with everyone) simply does not square with the data, namely, that millions if not billions of people died without ever hearing of said god.
True, but given how vindictive the Old Testament god was (destroying all the humans he had created with a global flood, for example) you could argue that he really didn't intend for every person to be granted the option for heaven and eternal life. Proving that the Christian God does not exist because not everyone has/had the opportunity to hear the gospel would require putting to rest any notion that this wasn't intentional.

When I was a kid we attended every summer a Christian bible camp in the mountains of NC. It's goal was to encourage everyone to be a missionary, and each night under a big tent the operators would give basically a sermon tailored for kids (with a skit partway through to hold attention). One night a story was told of a Peruvian farmer who lived high in the Andes, and was a good man his entire life. Never beat his wife or abused his kids, never drank or did drugs or committed any crimes, and lived happily with his extended family as farmers. Then he reaches old age as the story went, died, and burned in hell forever because no one was able to explain to him the story of Jesus.

I raised my hand and asked why there wasn't a plan B ... it wasn't the poor guy's fault that he happened to life in a place where there was no missionary could reach him, and the god I had been taught about (I was about 12) would never allow such a thing to happen. I was told that this is how it works, unfortunately, and why it is so important for me to grow up and become a missionary. The story had the opposite effect on me, and was the first time I questioned the whole Christianity thing. Something wasn't right about that scenario, and I eventually became an atheist in my late 20s after a much more in depth study of the world's religions. But that story was the first seed planted into my head that led me to question religion in general.
In human affairs the sources of success are ever to be found in the fountains of quick resolve and swift stroke; and it seems to be a law, inflexible and inexorable, that he who will not risk cannot win.
John Paul Jones, 1779

The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read.
Mark Twain

User avatar
Miles
Savant
Posts: 5179
Joined: Fri Aug 28, 2009 4:19 pm
Has thanked: 434 times
Been thanked: 1614 times

Re: A Simple Argument Against the Christian god's existence

Post #5

Post by Miles »

Rational Atheist wrote: Thu Jan 07, 2021 12:37 pm 1. If the Christian god exists, then he is all-powerful.
That's pretty much the claim alright. But so what? How about the fact that it's said he's all-loving? Or that he's all-forgiving?
2. If the Christian god exists, then he wants the gospel message of Jesus spread to people throughout the world.
Why? But if he does want the message spread why hasn't he done so. There have been millions of people who have lived and died without ever hearing the "gospel message." So why is his wanting at all relevant?
3. If the Christian god is all-powerful and wants the gospel spread, it follows that he would use the most efficient means to achieve this end of spreading the gospel.
Why? He's made blunders before, so using the most efficient means doesn't necessarily follow at all.
4. Since the only way the gospel is spread is through human missionaries and scribes (hence why it took nearly 1500 years for Christianity to reach North America), then God is not using the most efficient means to spread the gospel.
Actually, it was also spread through word of mouth other than by missionaries. And in our modern era it's also spread through the print and electronic media.
5. Conclusion: The Christian God, as defined in premises 1 and 2, does not exist.
Bad conclusion because your definitions in premises 1 and 2 lack any truth value. And just where does premise 3 fit into all this?
The only way to refute this argument is to show that premise 1 or premise 2 is false.
How about showing that they lack any substantiated truth value. And, your "If" premises make everything that follow conditional, even your conclusion. So your problem now is to show that god is all powerful, and that he does, in fact, want the gospel spread in the most efficient means. Short of this your conclusion here isn't worth a bag of beans. Heck, you haven't even shown that "he would use the most efficient means to achieve this end of spreading the gospel." While reasonable, it does not logically follow from god being all powerful and wanting the gospel spread.

Thing is, your conclusion doesn't follow from your premises at all! If you're going to construct a syllogism, which I take to be your aim here, you'd do well to look into formal logic before trying to use it.



.

Rational Atheist
Student
Posts: 71
Joined: Fri May 29, 2020 8:00 pm
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 31 times

Re: A Simple Argument Against the Christian god's existence

Post #6

Post by Rational Atheist »

[Replying to DrNoGods in post #4]

Interesting story. But the way I see it the bottom line is this: IF the christian god exists, it's either his will for the gospel to be spread or not. If it is his will, then he wouldn't need missionaries, since he's all powerful, and if he doesn't need them, why would he use them? There are FAR more efficient and sophisticated means of spreading the gospel that an omnipotent god could use. The fact that the gospel is ONLY spread through HUMANS is not what we would expect to see in a world under the control of an omnipotent god who wants the gospel to be spread. In fact, it is precisely what we would expect to see if the god was nothing more than a humanmade construct. If on the other hand, it's NOT the will of God for the gospel to be spread to people like the guy in your bible camp story, then missionaries are actually disobeying the will of God, and hence, sinning. Very few Christians would accept this idea of course, which is why I think my premises hold up.

Rational Atheist
Student
Posts: 71
Joined: Fri May 29, 2020 8:00 pm
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 31 times

Re: A Simple Argument Against the Christian god's existence

Post #7

Post by Rational Atheist »

[Replying to Miles in post #5]

Of course premise 3 follows from premise 2. If God didn't use the most efficient means to carry out his will when he COULD use them, he would be engaging in an act of self sabotage, which is nonsensical.

As far as looking into formal logic goes, I have a degree in pure math. Is that good enough?

bjs1
Sage
Posts: 898
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2020 12:18 pm
Has thanked: 41 times
Been thanked: 225 times

Re: A Simple Argument Against the Christian god's existence

Post #8

Post by bjs1 »

Rational Atheist wrote: Thu Jan 07, 2021 12:37 pm 1. If the Christian god exists, then he is all-powerful.
2. If the Christian god exists, then he wants the gospel message of Jesus spread to people throughout the world.
3. If the Christian god is all-powerful and wants the gospel spread, it follows that he would use the most efficient means to achieve this end of spreading the gospel.
4. Since the only way the gospel is spread is through human missionaries and scribes (hence why it took nearly 1500 years for Christianity to reach North America), then God is not using the most efficient means to spread the gospel.
5. Conclusion: The Christian God, as defined in premises 1 and 2, does not exist.
This is a form of the inductive fallacy called the fallacy of exclusion. That is, important evidence which would undermine this inductive argument has been excluded from consideration.

We might agree that an all-powerful God wants the Gospel message spread throughout the world. However, that same omnipotent God might have other goals which He holds to be of equal or higher importance. As a possible example, that God might want human involvement and genuine effort (not God doing it for them) in spreading the Gospel.

To put this another way, there is an unstated premise in this argument. The unstated premise could be written as:

2a. God has no other desire which is equal to or greater than the desire for the gospel message of Jesus spread to people throughout the world.

If this unstated premise is false (which seems very possible, at least within the orthodox Christian view) then everything that follows it is false.
Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge.
-Charles Darwin

Rational Atheist
Student
Posts: 71
Joined: Fri May 29, 2020 8:00 pm
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 31 times

Re: A Simple Argument Against the Christian god's existence

Post #9

Post by Rational Atheist »

[Replying to bjs1 in post #8]


This is an interesting objection, though I'd think an omnipotent being would not have the issue of prioritization of goals, since presumably he could achieve all of them without having to compromise on some of them since his powers are unlimited.

bjs1
Sage
Posts: 898
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2020 12:18 pm
Has thanked: 41 times
Been thanked: 225 times

Re: A Simple Argument Against the Christian god's existence

Post #10

Post by bjs1 »

Rational Atheist wrote: Thu Jan 07, 2021 10:04 pm [Replying to bjs1 in post #8]


This is an interesting objection, though I'd think an omnipotent being would not have the issue of prioritization of goals, since presumably he could achieve all of them without having to compromise on some of them since his powers are unlimited.
Most Christian theologians, and certainly most Christians who have posted on this forum, say that being all-powerful does not mean that God can do the logically impossible. Even with unlimited power, God cannot make “a” and “not a” true at the same time. A simple example is that God cannot make people with the ability to make a genuine choice (free) while those same people necessarily make the choice that God wants them to make (not free).

So if an all-powerful God has more than one goal, and some goals interfere with other goals, then even with unlimited power He would have to prioritize.



(Another possibility is that God is able to do the logically impossible. If that were the case then there can be no argument against God’s existence. All arguments are by definition based on logic. If logic has no hold on God then the mere act of a making an argument against God’s existence is self-contradictory.)
Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge.
-Charles Darwin

Post Reply