This is Why I Don't Believe in God

Summary

In this thought-provoking debate, Alex, a graduate in philosophy and theology, argues against the existence of a supernatural Creator. He presents three key challenges to theism: the problem of divine hiddenness, the geographical distribution of religious belief, and the issue of gratuitous suffering. Alex contends that atheism offers a better explanation for these phenomena, as divine silence and suffering appear inconsistent with a loving God. Drawing from personal experiences and philosophical arguments, Alex invites his audience to question the plausibility of theism and consider a naturalistic worldview as a more coherent account of reality.

Takeaways

• 😀 The speaker, Alex, is a philosophy and theology graduate, YouTuber, and self-identified non-believer, addressing the problem of divine hiddenness and the plausibility of atheism.
• 😀 Alex presents the problem of divine hiddenness, asking why a loving God would remain hidden from non-resistant non-believers who sincerely seek to find Him.
• 😀 He argues that atheism provides a better account for non-resistant non-belief than theism, citing personal experience and lack of divine response despite extensive engagement with religious texts and practices.
• 😀 The geographical predictability of religious belief is highlighted, where religious affiliation often correlates with one's place of birth, suggesting that belief may be culturally and geographically determined rather than divinely inspired.
• 😀 Alex questions how a loving God could allow such vast geographical disparities in belief, proposing that atheism offers a more coherent explanation for the global spread of religion as a cultural phenomenon.
• 😀 He challenges the concept of gratuitous suffering, questioning why a benevolent and omnipotent God would allow unnecessary or meaningless suffering in the world, particularly in small, mundane experiences.
• 😀 The argument extends to animal suffering, where Alex points out that animals, unlike humans, do not have free will or the ability to develop morally, making their suffering harder to justify under theism.
• 😀 Alex critiques the theistic response to suffering, specifically the free will defense and soul-making theodicy, which he believes fail to account for the widespread, seemingly pointless suffering in the world.
• 😀 He contrasts atheism's naturalistic explanation for suffering, where pain serves evolutionary and survival purposes, with theism's inability to explain suffering in a way that aligns with the idea of a loving, all-powerful God.
• 😀 Alex concludes by reaffirming that atheism provides a more plausible explanation for key issues like divine hiddenness, geographical religious distribution, and gratuitous suffering, and challenges Jonathan to offer a better account from the theistic perspective.

Q & A

What is Alex's main argument against the existence of God?

Alex argues that atheism provides a better explanation for three main issues: the problem of divine hiddenness, the geographical distribution of religious belief, and the existence of gratuitous suffering. He believes that the absence of direct divine revelation, the uneven spread of religious beliefs around the world, and the presence of seemingly meaningless suffering all challenge the plausibility of theism.

What is the 'Problem of Divine Hiddenness' that Alex presents?

The Problem of Divine Hiddenness refers to the idea that if God exists and is perfectly loving, He would not hide His presence from sincere seekers. Alex argues that many people, despite being open and non-resistant, are unable to find any evidence of God's existence, which suggests that a loving God would not allow such 'non-resistant non-belief.'

How does Alex differentiate between resistant and non-resistant non-belief?

Alex follows the framework of philosopher J.L. Schellenberg, who distinguishes between 'resistant non-belief' (where a person actively resists belief in God) and 'non-resistant non-belief' (where a person genuinely seeks and desires belief but is unable to find any convincing evidence of God's existence). Alex identifies himself as a non-resistant non-believer, having sincerely sought belief without success.

What is the significance of the geographical distribution of religious belief in Alex's argument?

Alex points out that the widespread variation in religious belief across regions suggests that belief in a particular religion is heavily influenced by where a person is born rather than being based on an objective truth. He questions how a loving, omnipotent God would allow salvation to be so geographically dependent, arguing that atheism provides a more coherent explanation of this pattern.

How does Alex critique the theistic explanation of suffering?

Alex argues that suffering, especially minor or seemingly unnecessary suffering (e.g., stubbing a toe or trivial animal suffering), challenges the existence of a benevolent and omnipotent God. He suggests that such suffering seems meaningless and unjustified, which is more easily explained by naturalism or atheism, which view suffering as a result of evolutionary processes rather than a divine plan.

What is 'gratuitous suffering' and why is it a problem for theism according to Alex?

Gratuitous suffering refers to suffering that appears unjustified, unnecessary, or meaningless. Alex argues that the existence of such suffering, both human and animal, challenges the notion of a benevolent and omnipotent God. The idea that some suffering serves no higher purpose contradicts the idea that a loving God would permit it.

Why does Alex find the suffering of animals particularly difficult to explain under theism?

Alex finds the suffering of animals particularly troubling because animals lack free will, cannot develop morally, and are not expected to be compensated for their suffering in the afterlife. This makes animal suffering seem even more unjustifiable under theism, while atheism can explain it as a result of the natural, amoral processes of evolution.

How does Alex use his personal experiences to support his argument?

Alex recounts his own extensive search for evidence of God's existence, including studying theology, attending religious services, and engaging with religious arguments. Despite all his efforts, he claims that he never experienced any divine presence or compelling evidence of God, reinforcing his position as a non-resistant non-believer.

How does Alex address the possibility that divine hiddenness is a result of human resistance to belief?

While Alex acknowledges that some people may resist belief in God due to their own biases or unwillingness, he insists that many people genuinely seek God and would welcome a relationship with Him. He argues that the absence of divine revelation for these people suggests that their lack of belief is not due to resistance but rather to a genuine lack of evidence.

What does Alex suggest is the best explanation for non-resistant non-belief?

Alex argues that atheism provides a better explanation for non-resistant non-belief than theism does. He believes that a universe without a divine being offers a more coherent account of the phenomenon of sincere seekers being unable to find any evidence for God's existence, whereas theism struggles to explain why a loving God would remain hidden from those who are genuinely open to belief.