Does God Exist Debate?

I think that most of William Lane Craig's arguments are based on wishful-thinking. It's very easy to fall into the trap of mistaking wishful-thoughts for truths. I understand why people are so passionate about defending their wishful-beliefs, and I understand why people spend so much effort justifying their wishful-beliefs to themselves, but I think the entire field of "apologetics" is mainly based on wishful-thinking. I also had the same thought when reading C.S. Lewis, like "He's trying so, so, so, so hard to convince himself that this is the truth." For example, the famous "Trilemma" where he completely ignores the fourth and, by far, most likely possibility (that Jesus is a legendary figure who was heavily mythologized.) Why? If you have to do a lot of work to "convince yourself" that something is true, shouldn't it be a pretty clear indication that it's not true?

If I could choose any reality I wanted, I'd definitely choose the reality where a loving God cares about me, has "a plan" for my life, answers my prayers and is there to see me through difficult times. I'd also definitely choose the reality where there's an afterlife - and, in fact, considering the possibility that life does not continue after death was the hardest thing about losing my religion. I still maintain a belief in the afterlife because I want to -- I find it very reassuring and comforting, but I'm under no delusion that my belief in an afterlife is anything more than "wishful thinking."

The harsh fact of the matter is that we can't choose our own reality. Our hopes and wishes don't dictate what's actually, really true. No matter how hard I wish for an afterlife, no matter how much I try to justify my belief in an afterlife, I can't make there really BE an afterlife if there really isn't one. I want to understand, and accept reality as it really is - even if it's not the reality that I personally desire.

As another great atheist philosopher, Carl Sagan said, "It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, no matter how satisfying and reassuring." I agree 100%! The fact that it's satisfying and reassuring isn't a good enough reason to believe that it's true.

I remain open to the possibility that some supreme being of some kind might exist. I also remain open to the possibility that there's some type of life after death. I'm sure that a lot of reality lies beyond our five senses, so I'm not going to say "I know for sure that this thing doesn't exist!" when I really can't possibly know that. But, I'm also not going to pretend to have any factual knowledge about anything that lies beyond my five senses. I can't say that any of these things DO exist, either.

Also, we don't really know that there aren't many gods. We don't know that the god controlling this universe is the ultimate bedrock of reality (how can you be so sure that this God wasn't created by another, more powerful God?) How can we be so sure that "god" isn't something just like "The Force" in Star Wars? How can we be sure that there's only one universe? How can we be sure that our god doesn't control several dozen universes? How do we know that God doesn't work in a team of close colleagues with other Gods who all control their own universes? How can we be so sure that our god isn't some idiot like "Q" on Star Trek? How can we be so sure that our God isn't being overseen by other gods? How can we be so sure that there aren't two equally-powerful, warring Gods who are constantly in combat with each other? Really, any of these ideas could be true. Also, what makes us so sure that Christianity is more true than Islam or Hindu? What makes us so sure that Lord Vishnu isn't the REAL God? I think it's absurd that anyone in this finite, limited world imagines that they can know factual things about beings who live beyond the bounds of space and time. There may in fact be some kind of "God", but this God is so far removed from our five senses that trying to know factual things about him is a futile exercise. There are infinite possibilities that all have an equal chance of being true.

But, as far as the question of "Does the specific God that Christians believe in exist?" my answer on that is a definitive "no." He doesn't pass most logic tests. His existence isn't economical (it's simpler and more straightforward to explain what we know about reality without him than with him; ie, his existence creates more problems than it solves.) The "Problem of Evil" is a particularly sticky issue that really can't be argued-around without resorting to some kind of moving-goalposts special-pleading type of argument such as "We can't understand the mysteries of God!" (but of course , if you truly can't understand God's mysteries, then you don't have any basis on which you can claim to have any factual knowledge at all about God. It drives me crazy that Christians only invoke this "God is too mysterious to understand" argument when attempting to rescue an argument that's in deep rhetorical trouble. If God is so "mysterious," shouldn't he be "mysterious" most of the time and not only when you're in the process of losing a debate?)

The God that Christians want to believe in (both omnipotent and omnibenevolent) is a God that can't possibly exist. It's irrational, it defies logic and reason, and it contradicts what we know and observe about the reality we live in. I've heard all the usual theodicies that people use to explain the "Problem of Evil," but none of them are good, and none of them can hold up under serious rational scrutiny.

The truth is something that should be true no matter what, which means that I shouldn't be able to poke any holes in explanations that are really true. The fact that I can poke holes in every attempt to explain "The Problem of Evil" is a big problem.

Some type of god may exist, but I can say with absolute confidence that this god is certainly not what Christians want it to be. If it's omnipotent, then it's not good. If it's omnibenevolent, then it isn't powerful. I have yet to see anyone produce a solution to this problem that can't be knocked right down. Most attempts to explain this problem either overlook a massive part of the problem, or else they're riddled with reasoning-errors. A solid answer needs to take all aspects of the problem into account, and it also needs to be based on good reasoning  -- I've never heard anyone produce an answer to the "Problem of Evil" that meets those criteria, and I also can't think of a good answer myself. So, the problem of evil is a huge sticking point for Christians, and it's also a huge reason why I feel so certain that the Christian God is not rationally possible. The whole "problem of evil" solves itself as soon as we acknowledge that God might not be quite what Christians want him to be.

So, I guess I'm "agnostic" to the possibility of any god, but I'm a 100% confident atheist as far as the Christian God goes (or any other man-made God. I also disbelieve Allah and Zeus, but I seem to end up discussing the Judeo-Christian God most of the time because I live in a western country.)

Theology is my favorite topic ever. I've studied theology at excessively great length, but I kind of think that "studying theology excessively" is the thing that caused me to be an atheist. I studied all the best arguments from all the best thinkers (St. Anselm! St. Thomas Aquinas!) and I slowly began to realize that their arguments were weak, and that I could poke holes in all of them, and that I probably shouldn't be able to poke any holes in true arguments. It was sort of painful to make that realization, but it was a realization that I had to make in order to be honest with myself. So, I gradually began questing for truth and leaving Christianity behind. First I was a Deist, then I was agnostic, so it was a gradual thing. I was never a hardcore Christian as an adult, though. I was once "a Christian" in the same sense that C.S. Lewis was once "an atheist." I think we all go through that period of questioning and exploring our beliefs when we're teenagers and young adults, but as we move along through our twenties, we begin to solidify our worldviews.