Proving there is no God
Let me start off by saying that the strongest evidence that God, a Christian/Jewish/Muslim God, cannot exist, is pure logic, I will demonstrate below.
However, I am interested in to why you get angry with God? If you believe in free will, then God can have NO influence on anything in the world to make sure it is completely free, if you think everyone has a destiny that God shapes, he then predestines people for hell, which would seem completely contrary to God’ nature. To say that a little of both are true is simply a foolish escape from answering the question of whether free will exists or not.
But let’s look at God from a logical point of view.
We must accept a few things first, which should be acceptable to anyone who has taken a high-school science course, or who knows anything about anything.
First, we know everything in the universe that interacts is made of matter and energy. Anti-matter, dark-matter, etc, is all matter and energy nonetheless. This is a proven fact, and common sense for anyone. if you have proof otherwise, please let me know.
Secondly, because of this, in order to interact with the Universe, God must be made of matter and energy. if he is, he is bound by the laws of physics and the rules and laws of this world, because he is made of that which must obey them. This makes miracles and such impossible, because God cannot do these miracles.
if you say he lives outside of the world beyond all capacity, then you are also saying that he CAN NOT interact with the physical world. If so, miracles are still impossible, and praying, and other such acts asking him to intervene in life, are all fruitless, since it would not be within God;s power, which brings me to my next point.
Omnipotence, or being all-powerful, is a logically self-contradictory concept. It is impossible to do everything. We’ve all heard the common proposition “can God make a rock so heavy he can’t lift?” It is perfectly valid, and shows how it is impossible to be able to do everything. Therefore, God logically cannot be all-powerful.
You could argue that God is not bound by logic, however that would be unfair of God. He must be bound by that which he creates, less he be an unjust God? Breaking his own rules doesn’t seem very fitting.
There are all kinds of arguments like ‘God is beyond our capacity to understand” and ‘God’s powers are too great” and these are all find arguments, however, these same people who propose these arguments claim to know how God thinks and works and what exactly it takes to go to heaven. This is to know the mind of God. So the argument is flawed at it’s core, beginning the question “Did you talk to God to find this out?” The answer is a determinative, “no.”
The logical contradictions God on and on in a myriad ways. I have simply put forward very basic concepts. I feel like many of the arguments here are really taken on a logical level, when logic is the most powerful tool to prove that God cannot exist.
You bring up many points, so I will try to briefly deal with each one:
Why am I angry with God? I’m not. I don’t believe God exists.
I think that free will is essentially a perceptual illusion. Free will from a religious perspective is a complex subject, and although I agree it can be difficult for religion to deal with, there are some coherent resolutions to the problems you mention. We can go into this in more detail if you like.
Your argument that everything that interacts with our universe is made of matter/energy therefore God is made of matter/energy does not follow. God, by definition, exists outside (but not exclusively outside) our universe, so at most you can say that if God interacts with our universe it must be through the use of matter and energy. The nature of God Himself remains in question.
Let us suppose that God is a necessarily existing immaterial being outside of our universe, and that God’s substance (so far as the word has meaning) is something called Will of God (WoG). One of the properties of WoG is that it can create and manipulate matter and energy, allowing God to create and manipulate our universe. WoG is neither matter nor energy, and it is not detectible by beings of matter and energy. This would put WoG outside the realm of science, so your demand that its existence be proven scientifically is unanswerable. At best we can study the effects produced when WoG impacts our universe.
Supposing that WoG exists seems to answer all of your objections. It is not a scientifically useful concept, but that’s okay because God Himself is not a scientifically useful concept (which is why attempts to prove that God does not exist using science are pretty much all doomed to failure; at best you could prove that God is not necessary).
I would say that omnipotence is logically self-contradictory only so far as it is badly defined. Can God make a rock so heavy he can’t lift it? No, but that’s okay because God is bound by logic (I have not seen any examples of competent theologians arguing that God is not so bound). You argue that God cannot be bound by what He creates, and I would say that you are incorrect in three ways. First, an all-good God could create a moral rule (such as a promise) that He would be bound by, and there is nothing unfair in this. Second, the laws of logic and mathematics exist of necessity and independent of God; they are not His creation. And third, it is recognized that God is limited in action even though omnipotent — for example, God is not able to choose to do evil because it is against His nature. Infinite power does not imply unbounded power.
You are correct that many people say that God is unfathomable and at the same time say that they know His will. However, there are rational, consistent ways of dealing with these topics. I agree, though, that it is unfortunate that more religious people don’t avow themselves of these methods. Too many people say they know what God wants when “His” will happens to coincide with their own, and say that God is unfathomable only when they are unable to justify their actions.
I agree with you that logic is the best tool for proving that certain descriptions of deity are impossible (although I don’t believe that disproving the existence of all deities is possible), but I don’t feel that you have proven your case here.