A Simple Argument Against the Christian god's existence

[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?

[nobspeople]

[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.)

For me, when someone says God is all powerful, there's no caveat to that; there's no 'well can can do everything but he can't do that' (to channel my inner Meatloaf-esqe-ness).
God's either all powerful or he's not - no inbetween.
If God created all things, this means he created all the rules of nature, logic, common sense and things we can't even imagine. And, if this is correct, he can do the (to us) logically impossible.
If God can't do this, then he's not all powerful IMO.

[William]

[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.)

For me, when someone says God is all powerful, there's no caveat to that; there's no 'well can can do everything but he can't do that' (to channel my inner Meatloaf-esqe-ness).
God's either all powerful or he's not - no inbetween.
If God created all things, this means he created all the rules of nature, logic, common sense and things we can't even imagine. And, if this is correct, he can do the (to us) logically impossible.
If God can't do this, then he's not all powerful IMO.

Even if [] could easily do the logically impossible I do not think I would like that to happen as it would interfere far to greatly with this particular experience I am having and spoil the illusion [] set up for me to experience.
This particular universe is good for gaining that experience in small handleable doses which helps me feel like I am also a contributing part of a huge thing which is also somewhat small when [] is looking at it...I am in no hurry on this ride.

[JehovahsWitness]

I can't see how any of that proves existence.

The most that can be argued is that He might be contrary or inconsistent in his stated purpose. Contrary and inconsistent individuals still exist.

If a man's wife tells him she wants a diamond ring for their anniversary but later expresses a desire to go on a cruise to Hawaii does that prove he has no wife?

You are not arguing what you seem to think you are.



JW

[nobspeople]

[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.)

For me, when someone says God is all powerful, there's no caveat to that; there's no 'well can can do everything but he can't do that' (to channel my inner Meatloaf-esqe-ness).
God's either all powerful or he's not - no inbetween.
If God created all things, this means he created all the rules of nature, logic, common sense and things we can't even imagine. And, if this is correct, he can do the (to us) logically impossible.
If God can't do this, then he's not all powerful IMO.

Even if [] could easily do the logically impossible I do not think I would like that to happen as it would interfere far to greatly with this particular experience I am having and spoil the illusion [] set up for me to experience.
This particular universe is good for gaining that experience in small handleable doses which helps me feel like I am also a contributing part of a huge thing which is also somewhat small when [] is looking at it...I am in no hurry on this ride.

Seems the logically impossible is already being done: people not only believing in, but excusing a god that kills people, listing it under 'justified'; people claiming God is all 'powerful but...'; Adam and Eve knew about death without being told or experiencing it, etc

[Rational Atheist]

[Replying to William in post #21]

Why would God be incapable of communicating directly to humans without causing them to drop dead? There are plenty of ways an all-powerful deity could communicate that would not cause people to drop dead and would also be better than only communicating through humans. For instance, he could carve Bible verses on the surface of the moon or Mars. He could make it snow in 80 degree weather and adjust the wind in such a way to make the snow spell out John 3:16. Or, he could speak to people, like he supposedly did in the Old Testament era. I think it's outrageous to conclude that a god couldn't use better means of communicating with people. And we know that, according to Christianity, the god of Christianity presumably wants to communicate with people, hence why he has a bible, preachers, and prophets. But WHY use these methods? That's the question. The use of these terribly archaic and inefficient methods just doesn't square with the idea that an infinitely intelligent and powerful god exists and wants to communicate with people. If God exists, he's obviously trying to make it look like he doesn't exist, because the fact that people ONLY hear about God from OTHER PEOPLE and never directly from God is exactly what we would expect to see if God did not exist.

[nobspeople]

[Replying to Rational Atheist in post #26]

...people ONLY hear about God from OTHER PEOPLE and never directly from God is exactly what we would expect to see if God did not exist.

To be fair, many people claim to hear directly from God. Of course there's no way to verify that and we have to take their claims on faith that they're not telling a fib. That, itself, doesn't prove God exists, just that those people making direct communication claims from God believes so.

[JehovahsWitness]

2. If the Christian god exists, then he wants the gospel message of Jesus spread to people throughout the world.

Your conclusion is based on a series of suppositions, one of which is that the Christian God has a sole goal, notably "the gospel message of Jesus spread to people throughout the world". If that were indeed his ONLY consideration then we might indeed extract from that some specific assumptions, however if (as scripture seems to indicate) there are other considerations, your assessment of "efficency" lacks the elements necessary to come to a reaonable conclusion.

If a diplomat in Paris wanted to negotiate a peace treaty in London it would not be seen as "efficient" to travel there via Berlin. Unless he needed the accord of the Ambassador of Germany first.

The Devil, as they say is in the details.



JW



RELATED POSTS
Does God reach out to save people through human envoys?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 70#p940370

To learn more please go to other posts related to...

EVANGELIZING , THE GREAT COMMISSION and .... JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES ,

[Tcg]

I was under the impression that everyone present for “the Babel incident” was dead long before Jesus came along. To be clear, even if you take the Babel story as precisely literal neither the Bible nor Christian tradition say that the Babel incident was the source of differing languages from that point on; only that God confused the people’ languages at that moment.

Really? The first link I checked after a simple search lead to this:

What Was the Tower of Babel?

Situated in Genesis 11:1-9, we encounter an odd story that seems to explain why so many languages have formed on earth.

In essence, a group of people gathered together (in a disputed location, some say Babylon, others have other conjectures), to create a tower that would reach the heavens. Essentially, they wanted to become like God.

God, seeing this, confuses their language so they can’t communicate with one another and finish the tower. By “confuses their language” we mean, creates multiple languages.

They built this tower to shake a fist at the sky. In doing so, they wrote the demise of one language. Hence the reasons why we have some many languages today. It all started with the Tower of Babel. Even when they attempted to defy God, they didn't stand a chance to go against his will.

https://www.christianity.com/wiki/chris ... babel.html

<bolding mine>

The Christians who created this website clearly disagree with your assessment of what the Bible and Christian tradition says about the Babel incident. Of course we shouldn't be surprised to see Christians disagreeing with other Christians. It is one of the things we can expect to see in Christianity.


Tcg

[Paul of Tarsus]

There are some things God cannot do, and he might need people to evangelize him.

There appears to be an almost endless number of things God can't do. One would think however that speaking would be within his reach.

It is possible to explain God's silence and apparent absence from the world. In John 1 we are told that "the Word became flesh." As you may know the Greek for "Word" in this passage is Logos. The Logos is the idea that the divine cannot interact directly with the world and the people in it. The Logos can be thought of as a bridge between God and humanity. According to Christian theology, Jesus is that bridge. So the Logos explains why we do not normally see or hear God but see and hear those disciples sent by Christ.

[nobspeople]

There are some things God cannot do, and he might need people to evangelize him.

There appears to be an almost endless number of things God can't do. One would think however that speaking would be within his reach.

It is possible to explain God's silence and apparent absence from the world. In John 1 we are told that "the Word became flesh." As you may know the Greek for "Word" in this passage is Logos. The Logos is the idea that the divine cannot interact directly with the world and the people in it. The Logos can be thought of as a bridge between God and humanity. According to Christian theology, Jesus is that bridge. So the Logos explains why we do not normally see or hear God but see and hear those disciples sent by Christ.

With God, something that's not tactile nor attainable, anything is possible. Ice cream eating unicorns on Uranus is possible if we look hard enough!
This Christian 'idea' strikes me as yet another Christian excuse.
"God isn't talking to people. What can we do about this? I know, let's created an idea that it's not possible now, unless, you use this method!"
Aside from that, if a God that's supposed to be all powerful and capable of anything (as many, though not all, Christians claim) that 'can't' do something isn't all powerful and thus, not the god many claim he is.
Additionally, there are people today - most, but not all, are Christians - that claim God does, indeed, not only talk to them, but interacts with them directly.

So this ideal seems, at best, fraudulent; at worse, a down right lie.