50 Erroneous Proofs of God's Non-Existence 1:1-8

50 Erroneous Proofs of God's Non-Existence 1:1-8

Introduction

A while back I received an e-mail which included a link to a web-page entitled “God Is Imaginary”. The sender of the e-mail (my brother) thought I “might find the site interesting”, and if truth be told, I did. At first I was less than impressed, however, with the author’s various arguments, and was even ready to dismiss the entire thing as just another example of a so-called atheist trying to sound intelligent about something of which he actually knew very little, or nothing. That opinion of mine has not changed, but after a more in-depth perusal of the web-site I became convinced that there were other reasons, good reasons, to pursue this matter at least a little further. Frankly, I just figured it was about time that someone, anyone, answer these charges yet again. It just wouldn’t do to have our continued silence on these matters interpreted as acquiescence. 

Any person of faith who is worth his salt knows how ridiculous these so-called “proofs” appear to anyone who knows anything about the subject, but there are those who have just begun to seek after enlightenment, or understanding, and it is mainly for those souls that I have decided to make this reply. If even one newcomer to the journey of faith should find themselves helped in any way by the words upon these pages which follow, then the entire process will have been worthwhile. Before confronting such a large body of vitriolic views, however, there is something that must be said about the manner which I shall employ in performing the task that lays before me.

I am a Christian, and as such, all that follows will necessarily be influenced by at least a couple of core beliefs upon which my very identity is grounded, and which, by my very (new) nature, I could never deny. For instance, I have no doubt whatsoever that a supreme Being exists; I refer to that entity as "God". This belief in no way hinders, and certainly does not disqualify, anything I may say regarding the various subjects that are yet to follow. As much as I cannot show empirical evidence which supports my view, by that same amount is my opponent unable to show empirical evidence that proves the non-existence of such a Supreme Being. Therefore, we are at best reduced to a situation where we are arguing opposing points of view, or opinion. I suggest, however, that the basis upon which my belief is grounded, is  a sound one that can much better be understood than my opponents beliefs, which actually require much greater faith than anything demanded of those of us in the Christian religion.

One need only look around their own environment to see that in the scope, and at the scale, of this world we live in, variation in quality is everywhere. One man builds a building, another man builds a better one. One man runs faster than any other man in the world, until another man claims the title from him. An artist creates a piece of work, but there is always the work of a Michelangelo to fail in comparison to. The mouse hunts for his food, a better hunter hunts the mouse, and is himself hunted by yet a better hunter. Prodigies  are everywhere, and by their very nature are "superior" to others in their particular area of expertise. It takes very little faith to believe in that which is so evident in our day-to-day surroundings. 

At a larger scale, it takes only a little more faith (and perhaps some "natural" human biases) to see what we would call the differences in quality of the various countries scattered throughout this world. If I were to ask you which of the countries upon this planet you would most like to live in, it seems quite reasonable to me that your answer would be based largely upon which of those countries you believed to be the "best"; which of those countries do you believe to be the "greatest". Forms of government work exactly the same way; is there anyone who doesn't believe one type of government is better than another? If not, why did so many people, on all sides, bother to die in every war ever fought?

Speaking of war, what is the difference between a "civil disturbance" or a "full-blown revolution"? Is it not quite often determined as much by its "magnitude" as by anything else? And is there anyone who will deny the difference of quality between a fresh recruit and a Navy Seal? 

It should also be noted that size is not always going to be counted as "better". But still, through whatever means is used, in whatever exists within this world,  the concept of "better" will always need to be determined. A brief example might even more clearly explain my views on this.

As a Christian, I am called upon, and even commanded to, "love my neighbor as I love myself". When I was still young in the faith, I wondered exactly what this meant (if you think its obvious, try giving it some serious thought). How exactly does one "love him/herself"? After considering the matter for some time it occurred to me that loving myself, or anyone else for that matter, was very closely "related" at least, to the "satisfying of desire". If you love someone, you will usually recognize what things that person desires from life, and as an expression of your love, you will seek to satisfy those desires if you can. This certainly does not have to include only material things, though at times it will, but it may also be comprised of moral or spiritual desires, certainly affection and understanding, and also hopes and dreams of better things yet to come. It is herein that I finally arrived at what I now believe to be the crux of the matter. "Everyone desires something just a little better than what they already have. Thus, in order to love someone as I love myself, I need only to seek for that person, something which is, in some substantial way, better than that which they already possess."  This can be manifested in a myriad of ways.

Consider a little child walking down the street, holding the mother or father's hand, and longing for the day when he/she will be able to take that walk alone. But he/she doesn't make such a major transition in one huge jump. There are many stages in the process, such as foregoing the sense of security that is contained in the simple act of hand-holding itself. The child would be happy to walk beside mom or dad, but do they have to hold his/her hand so that everyone they encounter will see just what a little baby they are? And next comes the issue of "proximity"; they are happy to walk on their own, as long as the parent is still in sight. And on and on it goes. But accomplishing each of those steps, or stages, at least in the heart of that child, brings with it a certain amount of happiness, as well as a sense of "worth" and "accomplishment". With each step they obtain something that they consider to be "better" than what they already had. When the parent finds the child at any given stage in this process, and if they want to express their love, they might allow the child to move on to the next step, satisfying the little one's desire for progress (timing is also part of the way we express that love, but it still remains, the child will feel the love much more clearly when he/she receives that which is just a little better in their eyes than what they previously possessed). 

What about that same child, when he/she reaches driving age? Their first desire is probably not even for a car, but rather, a driver's license. It is only after having obtained that license that the desire becomes one of wanting a car. It doesn't have to be a great car, any old beater will do, but their entire life will come to an abrupt end if they can't have a vehicle of their own. At least, to hear them say it. So they get a beater at the used-car lot, and very soon their desire becomes the "need" for a car that looks a little better, or burns a little less oil, or holds more people, or whatever. But through all of this, one thing remains the same. Everybody desires something just a little better than what they already have. It is also for this very reason that not many men are ever completely satisfied with their lot in life, for no matter how much they acquire, or accomplish, there will always remain that universal longing for something even better.

In regard to the larger things in this universe, can it not be said that even though a new star is discovered, it would be better to discover a star that was populated, or at least able to be populated, and would it not be better still to discover a habitable planet within the reach of man? So you can clearly see that the desire for something better is universal, not only among men, but in all of the nature that surrounds us. This brings us full circle back to why I believe in God, the Supreme Being.

After all, our very desire for something better is so ingrained within all of us, that it speaks quite loudly as proof, that the variations in quality which I mentioned earlier, do in fact exist. And if everything can be improved upon, and everything falls short of matching the quality of the next thing above it, it should not take a major leap of faith to humble ourselves through the acceptance that there is something "better" than ourselves. Whatever that might be, it should be remembered that there is also something better than that, until there isn't, at which point, you have discovered God...or have you? Just use your imagination to climb the ladder of improvement by adding new, or superior qualities, to each and every stage that you can think of, and then when you have reached the limit of your imagination, remember these words from the Bible:

"Great is the Lord and most worthy of praise;

His greatness no one can fathom."

            Psalm 145:3 (Emphasis mine.)

So what the Holy Word is telling us is that it doesn't matter how great our imagination is, God is greater still. I would suggest that whatever limitations are burdening your understanding of greatness, it is at that point, where you can conceive of nothing greater, that your "God" in fact resides. For God is another name for the Supreme Being, and if you cannot think of anything greater than that which you have already thought of, then you have defined your concept of the Supreme Being, and you have also defined the God you believe in. And this is why I say that being an atheist requires more faith than believing in God. We have already seen that quality is governed by variation, and if you truly believe there is nothing greater than yourself, then you have just personally claimed to be the Supreme Being, since you believe there is nothing better; you have claimed to be God. And if you do accept that there are variations in quality, then when you reach the apex of those variations, that final variation is your God. You may ask me a million times to believe that you (or each and every one of us) is God, but to do so, I would need more than a million times the amount of faith I have. That kind of god will always be far too small for me.

 Also, the entire argument of not believing in anything is simply ridiculous. Your beliefs may be quite small, or naive, but nonetheless, they are beliefs. Each day when you get up, you believe there will be enough air to breath, and sufficient gravity to keep you earthbound. You believe you can deal with your hunger by eating something, and your thirst by having a drink. Everybody believes in something, some beliefs are simply more substantial than others.

So why is it that I say "atheists" are trying to sound intelligent about something of which they know very little, or nothing? To answer that question, I have to remind you that my opponent has voiced many of his opinions that are obviously grounded in his belief that there is no God, or at best, that God is a mythological Being that can, or has already been, "proven" to not exist. I can only answer him with my own opinions which are grounded in my Christian belief that God certainly does exist, and this I believe has been proven by His revelation of Himself which is contained in the Holy Scriptures, the entire creation of which we are part, and in each and every individual among us who has not yet exercised the Free Will they were gifted with to decide to reject those very same revelations. In rejecting God's offer to come to Him, the individual takes unto himself the character of an unbeliever, and this is what the Bible has to say about that:

“The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned.”

            1 Corinthians 2:14 (Emphasis mine.)

So in the end, the point of everything I have just said is really quite a simple one. If you start with an average man, and seek out a man that is better in some way, then continue repeating the process an undetermined amount of times, when you can no longer think of any way to improve upon the latest variation, then you will have defined your concept of the Supreme Being, and that is where you will find the God which you can claim to believe in.

For myself, I believe in the God of the Bible, and as such, everything I say which follows will be grounded upon that belief. It should go without saying that whenever I support a particular argument by referencing the Bible, it is because I believe in the "infallibility" of the Holy Word. If you are tempted to reject anything I say according to that fashion, please be reminded that I have given heed to everything that was included in the web-page in question, even though all of those arguments are based on the secular beliefs of the web-site's author(s).

So with all that being said, let me now direct my comments explicitly to the author(s) of the web page entitled "God Is Imaginary".