what i think are 2 strong arguments for god not existing [let me hear your thoughts] [READ]

[ascensionneeeded]

2 arguments against religion that i believe are strong (skip to bottom of text please)

• The Unjust Damnation Argument
If God is perfectly loving and just, then he would not condemn people to eternal suffering for an honest mistake - especially when that mistake is based on the evidence (or lack thereof) available to them. However, many non-believers are rational, moral individuals who have simply made a reasonable decision based on the information at their disposal. If God punishes these individuals despite their good intentions and honest reasoning, then salvation is ultimately a matter of luck rather than justice. This contradicts the idea of a benevolent and fair God.

- to summarise: why would an all-loving god send good people to eternal suffering for simply making the wrong decision (eg choosing islam or atheism) when the evidence/lack of evidence means it was a perfectly justified and valid decision to make. why would an all loving god punish people for making a valid decision? he sends people to eternal suffering because they had bad luck?

• The Contradictory Religions Argument
The existence of multiple, mutually exclusive religions—each with devout followers who sincerely believe they have the absolute truth—undermines the credibility of any specific religion. If divine revelation were real, we would expect clear, universal agreement rather than conflicting doctrines. Since religions like Christianity and Islam cannot both be true, at least one must be false. But if one deeply entrenched religious tradition can be false, this increases the likelihood that allare the result of human culture rather than divine truth. The conflicting nature of religious claims suggests that no single religion has a monopoly on truth—making it far more plausible that God, as described by these religions, does not exist at all.

to summarise: both muslims and christian’s can’t both go to their paradise. if they both could then there wouldn’t be contradictions and all the muslims could just switch to christianity, a less strict religion. this suggests that one of these religions has to be incorrect. both have a lot of devout followers, religious texts, arguments to prove their religion. if one of these religions isn’t true, which one has to be, then that means the religion is false and all the devout followers, religious texts and arguments for its existence fall apart. none of it is real. if this can apply to one religion (eg islam) then it can apply to christianity too. therefore both religions can ultimately be untrue.


!! just want to say that i don’t intend for this to be an attempt to disrespect anyone’s beliefs. these are just my views. i respect people for having their own beliefs and following different religions - especially if it helps them. id just like to hear anyone’s thoughts on these and i will reply in a understanding and reasonable manner (scroll up to top of the text)

 

[liberty]

debating religion is like trying to clean a pool that is getting filled with a truckload of bullshit every 5 minutes

religious people can keep inventing rationalizations for any counterargument you have against them on the fly, it never ends

 

[ascensionneeeded]

debating religion is like trying to clean a pool that is getting filled with a truckload of bullshit every 5 minutes

religious people can keep inventing rationalizations for any counterargument you have against them on the fly, it never ends

very true. people are never willing to accept that they are incorrect on something as big as religion. first reason is that in accepting that there’s no god they will become scared as i personally think god is a coping mechanism for a lot of people. people are scared of not having answers or the thought of existence ending.

 

[JasGews69x]

If God is perfectly loving and just, then he would not condemn people to eternal suffering for an honest mistake

He doesnt - He gives them time to repent and will accept sincere repentance.

especially when that mistake is based on the evidence (or lack thereof) available to them.

There is evidence, which evidence would even convince you that it comes from God?
Maybe there is evidence but you're ignoring it?

many non-believers are rational, moral individuals

How do you determine what is moral and immoral?

God determines what is moral and immoral since He made everything and Hes the Judge

If God punishes these individuals despite their good intentions and honest reasoning, then salvation is ultimately a matter of luck rather than justice.

If they are honest and sincere and die on it, they will tested separately on the Day of Judgement,
but most people are arrogant liars unfortunately
God has given EVERYONE natural inclination that there is Something above us that is Eternal, All-Powerful

The existence of multiple, mutually exclusive religions—each with devout followers who sincerely believe they have the absolute truth—undermines the credibility of any specific religion

You can research through them to come to a conclusion that there is only one true religion.
Such as the reliability of the scripture, who it was written by and if there any manuscripts dating back to the time etc.

If divine revelation were real, we would expect clear, universal agreement rather than conflicting doctrines.

God does things the way He wants, not the way that Humans want it to be done.
God sent Revelation since the 1st Man but humans changed it later.
Anyway, they all agree that a Supreme Creator and Authority (that is One) exists.
As well as an Afterlife.

Since religions like Christianity and Islam cannot both be true, at least one must be false. But if one deeply entrenched religious tradition can be false, this increases the likelihood that allare the result of human culture rather than divine truth.

They both agree that God is One. But Christians of today have introduced the idea the idea of trinity which didnt exist untill 300 years after Jesus left Earth.

Christianity wasnt preached by Jesus Christ so you could say it is man made. It came after Jesus

However, Islam can be traced back to the Founder which is a strong point for it against all other religions.

 

[kindinternetman]

He doesnt - He gives them time to repent and will accept sincere repentance.

There is evidence, which evidence would even convince you that it comes from God?
Maybe there is evidence but you're ignoring it?

How do you determine what is moral and immoral?

God determines what is moral and immoral since He made everything and Hes the Judge

If they are honest and sincere and die on it, they will tested separately on the Day of Judgement,
but most people are arrogant liars unfortunately
God has given EVERYONE natural inclination that there is Something above us that is Eternal, All-Powerful

You can research through them to come to a conclusion that there is only one true religion.
Such as the reliability of the scripture, who it was written by and if there any manuscripts dating back to the time etc.

God does things the way He wants, not the way that Humans want it to be done.
God sent Revelation since the 1st Man but humans changed it later.
Anyway, they all agree that a Supreme Creator and Authority (that is One) exists.
As well as an Afterlife.

They both agree that God is One. But Christians of today have introduced the idea the idea of trinity which didnt exist untill 300 years after Jesus left Earth.

Christianity wasnt preached by Jesus Christ so you could say it is man made. It came after Jesus

However, Islam can be traced back to the Founder which is a strong point for it against all other religions.

Islam is the weakest religion. They believe in the events of the New Testament but follow the Quran, despite the New Testament stating that any books or religions that comes after revelations is to be ignored as it is false. So that’s the Qurans first contradiction. Also they say that Jesus was not killed on the cross and that he’s not God, despite all of the biblical Evidence of Jesus’s death on the cross. As well as Jesus stating that him and the Father are of the same essence.

 

[JasGews69x]

Islam is the weakest religion.

They believe in the events of the New Testament but follow the Quran,

No they dont, they only believe in what is in line with the Quran if it is and reject what isnt in the Quran

despite the New Testament stating that any books or religions that comes after revelations is to be ignored as it is false.

They dont believe in the New Testament, they believe in the Revelation that was given to Jesus (Injeel).

Did Jesus have or preach the New Testament in his time?

Also they say that Jesus was not killed on the cross and that he’s not God, despite all of the biblical Evidence of Jesus’s death on the cross.

The Quran says it looked like he was killed.
What will history say if it looks like he died? That he died right?

As well as Jesus stating that him and the Father are of the same essence

Bible verse?
I and the Father are one.” John 10:30
It doesnt say they have the same essence. That is just your interpretation using trinitarian lens.

The Bible also says that disciples are one with Jesus like how Jesus is one with the Father.
Does that mean the disciples are also god?

 

[DeborahAnnWollFARTS]

the biggest argument against religion is the sole existence of incels

 

[rybxxz]

2 arguments against religion that i believe are strong (skip to bottom of text please)

• The Unjust Damnation Argument
If God is perfectly loving and just, then he would not condemn people to eternal suffering for an honest mistake - especially when that mistake is based on the evidence (or lack thereof) available to them. However, many non-believers are rational, moral individuals who have simply made a reasonable decision based on the information at their disposal. If God punishes these individuals despite their good intentions and honest reasoning, then salvation is ultimately a matter of luck rather than justice. This contradicts the idea of a benevolent and fair God.

- to summarise: why would an all-loving god send good people to eternal suffering for simply making the wrong decision (eg choosing islam or atheism) when the evidence/lack of evidence means it was a perfectly justified and valid decision to make. why would an all loving god punish people for making a valid decision? he sends people to eternal suffering because they had bad luck?

• The Contradictory Religions Argument
The existence of multiple, mutually exclusive religions—each with devout followers who sincerely believe they have the absolute truth—undermines the credibility of any specific religion. If divine revelation were real, we would expect clear, universal agreement rather than conflicting doctrines. Since religions like Christianity and Islam cannot both be true, at least one must be false. But if one deeply entrenched religious tradition can be false, this increases the likelihood that allare the result of human culture rather than divine truth. The conflicting nature of religious claims suggests that no single religion has a monopoly on truth—making it far more plausible that God, as described by these religions, does not exist at all.

to summarise: both muslims and christian’s can’t both go to their paradise. if they both could then there wouldn’t be contradictions and all the muslims could just switch to christianity, a less strict religion. this suggests that one of these religions has to be incorrect. both have a lot of devout followers, religious texts, arguments to prove their religion. if one of these religions isn’t true, which one has to be, then that means the religion is false and all the devout followers, religious texts and arguments for its existence fall apart. none of it is real. if this can apply to one religion (eg islam) then it can apply to christianity too. therefore both religions can ultimately be untrue.


!! just want to say that i don’t intend for this to be an attempt to disrespect anyone’s beliefs. these are just my views. i respect people for having their own beliefs and following different religions - especially if it helps them. id just like to hear anyone’s thoughts on these and i will reply in a understanding and reasonable manner (scroll up to top of the text)

@TrveShortcel

 

[paladincel_]

debating religion is like trying to clean a pool that is getting filled with a truckload of bullshit every 5 minutes

religious people can keep inventing rationalizations for any counterargument you have against them on the fly, it never ends

They can, but not effectively. (Debate is still useless though). At some point it's just obvious that what they're saying is moronic delusional sophistry. e.g. "God allows evil because he needs to allow free will." Okay why is free will above God? There's no reasonable answer to this.

 

[TrveShortcel]

The Divine Essence isn’t morally obligated to do anything, actually…….

 

[JasGews69x]

"God allows evil because he needs to allow free will.

Bruh, this life is a Test to reveal the true character of a person.

If God removed evil every time it happened then everyone would have died a long time ago.

 

[ascensionneeeded]

Bruh, this life is a Test to reveal the true character of a person.

If God removed evil every time it happened then everyone would have died a long time ago.

no? if god removed evil we would all be living a better life.

 

[kazama]

 

[mandiblade]

If God is perfectly loving and just, then he would not condemn people to eternal suffering for an honest mistake - especially when that mistake is based on the evidence (or lack thereof) available to them

I do not know which religion you are referencing, but Islam does not claim this. Islam considers "kufr" to be rejection out of arrogance or because you hide the truth. A dude living in a cave in madagascar will not be judged the same as a guy who experiences cognitive dissonance numerous times and still refuses to believe.

However, many non-believers are rational, moral individuals who have simply made a reasonable decision based on the information at their disposal. If God punishes these individuals despite their good intentions and honest reasoning, then salvation is ultimately a matter of luck rather than justice. This contradicts the idea of a benevolent and fair God

Non-believers != rejectors. Doing the minimum amount of reasoning and debating to reach a conclusion is not "a reasonable decision based on the information at their disposal." Who decides what "good intentions and honest reasoning" are? If you had "good intentions and honest reasoning," you would do your absolute best to find the truth.
"then salvation is ultimately a matter of luck rather than justice. This contradicts the idea of a benevolent and fair God"
I refuted this in my previous semi-paragrah

The existence of multiple, mutually exclusive religions—each with devout followers who sincerely believe they have the absolute truth—undermines the credibility of any specific religion

Why so? Is the truth of a religion based on how convinced its followers are? Using this logic, the existence of carnivores, vegans, omnivores, animal-baseders, raypeaters, frugivores, and other diet groups detracts from the reliability of all of them. Before you say that the difference is studies, religions are to be chosen based off of evidence and reasoning as well.

If divine revelation were real, we would expect clear, universal agreement rather than conflicting doctrines

Why do you expect that? In addition, who are you to expect that from an omnipotent God, if He exists? Did you want Him to destroy anything that disagrees with the truth? Why so? Why is this an argument that undermines the credibility of religion?

But if one deeply entrenched religious tradition can be false, this increases the likelihood that all are the result of human culture rather than divine truth.

How have you came to this conclusion? In addition, grouping up all religions into one basket under the title of "religion" only happened when atheists in the 21st/20th century chose to invent academia.

The conflicting nature of religious claims suggests that no single religion has a monopoly on truth—making it far more plausible that God, as described by these religions, does not exist at all

What on the planet is this reasoning? Due to the fact that multiple religions disagree, all religions are therefore more likely false. How on the planet does this make God's existence less plausible?!

then that means the religion is false and all the devout followers, religious texts and arguments for its existence fall apart. none of it is real. if this can apply to one religion (eg islam) then it can apply to christianity too. therefore both religions can ultimately be untrue

I am starting to suspect that this was actually written by chatgpt, but if it wasn't I believe that assuming that the probably based on pure numbers affects the chance that they are true. Of course, it numerically does, but this doesn't matter because we're not gambling. Of course both can be untrue. They can be. This is why they must be examined.

debating religion is like trying to clean a pool that is getting filled with a truckload of junk every 5 minutes

Your profile picture is a modification of the reddit logo. Expected response.

religious people can keep inventing rationalizations for any counterargument you have against them on the fly, it never ends

Yes, that's called thinking. Unless you give specific examples, this is not a fair criticism. Of course, when you do bring a specific example, you might then say this again. However, it is an unfair and unproductive generalization that has no real purpose but to insult.

people are never willing to accept that they are incorrect on something as big as religion. first reason is that in accepting that there’s no god they will become scared as i personally think god is a coping mechanism for a lot of people. people are scared of not having answers or the thought of existence ending

People are never willing to change their minds unless they train themselves. The same applies to atheists and antitheists.

They believe in the events of the New Testament but follow the Quran, despite the New Testament stating that any books or religions that comes after revelations is to be ignored as it is false

On what basis have you concluded the premise of your argument? We only believe in the events of the New Testament that have sufficient evidence to be believed in from an Islamic worldview. In that case, we would not be believing them any more than atheists do, with the exception of overlaps in the Quran and Ahadith.

Also they say that Jesus was not killed on the cross and that he’s not God, despite all of the biblical Evidence of Jesus’s death on the cross

"Biblical" evidence is always circular reasoning, unless Christianity's truth has been assumed on and one is trying to derive rulings from the Bible(like fiqh but in Christianity). The same applies to Muslims using the Quran to prove the Quran. Using arguments from the Quran would be fine in an interfaith debate, but relying on the Quran as an objective source of truth would not work in an interfaith debate.

the biggest argument against religion is the sole existence of incels

How? Which religion claims that incels do not exist? Which religion has a set of premises or arguments that would allow the idea of the nonexistence of incels to follow?

They can, but not effectively. (Debate is still useless though). At some point it's just obvious that what they're saying is moronic delusional sophistry. e.g. "God allows evil because he needs to allow free will." Okay why is free will above God? There's no reasonable answer to this

This has been refuted numerous times. Once free will has been facilitated, evil automatically exists. On what basis are you concluding that free will is above God? If you are claiming that it is above God's attribute of Mercy, it is not. Would it be above His attribute of Mercy if every time someone got slapped, they would be slapped back in 100 years? Would it be so if the slapee was getting "positive karma"(I am not claiming the existence of karma...it was an analogy) or positive deeds?

no? if god removed evil we would all be living a better life.

Kind of addressed this.

@rrm_ss2

 

[DeborahAnnWollFARTS]

How? Which religion claims that incels do not exist? Which religion has a set of premises or arguments that would allow the idea of the nonexistence of incels to follow?

Cucktianity