In my last blog post (“Reasons to Think God Exists”), I noted atypical reasons to believe God might exist. Those reasons come after a yet-to-be-published discussion of traditional reasons people think God exists. Those typical arguments appeal to design, first cause, morality, religious experiences, and so on.
In that as-of-yet-unpublished discussion, I also address reasons to think God doesn’t exist. Those included the problem of evil, diverse religions and religious experiences, scientific explanations, and so on.
I Believe
Reasons to believe in God vary in their persuasiveness. The force of reasons not to believe also varies. After weighing each and considering all, I conclude it’s more plausible than not that God exists. Others weigh the reasons and conclude differently.
Most arguments for belief point to evidence of God’s presence. Many people report feeling loved by God, and some interpret specific events as evidence of divine care. I sometimes feel this. In various ways and at various times, many of us get the impression a compassionate Lover acts in our lives and the universe.
The Unnoticed Commonality
The strongest arguments against God’s existence share something few people notice. They implicitly or explicitly assume God can control creatures or creation. Most assume omnipotence.
These arguments presuppose the existence of an all-powerful deity who can bring about outcomes singlehandedly. Our experiences don’t require this assumption, however. But believing in an omnipotent God is the default for billions of people.
For a host of reasons, I reject the idea God is omnipotent. This rejection has numerous upsides, but I note here that we overcome the strongest reasons for atheism or agnosticism when we believe God exists but can’t control creatures or creation.
If God is not omnipotent, for instance, the Lover of the universe is not culpable for failing to prevent evil. And this is a big deal! This reason to reject belief in God is the most cited by atheists and agnostics. But few people consider the possibility that a loving God exists who is not omnipotent.
Rejecting omnipotence helps us account for the errors, contradictions, and inconsistencies in the Bible. An all-powerful God could eliminate those problems; an uncontrolling Lover cannot. Rejecting omnipotence helps us understand how the Bible could be inspired and yet reflect the worldviews of the authors and have inconsistent theological claims. An uncontrolling God also can’t control our interpretations of scripture.
Diverse Religious Experiences
The best objection to billions of people who claim to have experienced God is the diverse and often contradictory descriptions they give those experiences. An omnipotent God could guarantee those contradictory descriptions never arise. In fact, an all-powerful God could ensure that everyone understands all necessary truths for salvation, which would significantly reduce the number of religious traditions in the world.
A loving God who cannot control when communicating, however, can’t control our experiences, descriptions, and interpretations of the divine. We should expect uniform descriptions of religious experience if God is omnipotent.
Other Reasons to Reject Omnipotence
The long and winding evolutionary process, which includes senseless death and species dead ends, makes better sense if God influences but can’t control creation. The loving God who can’t control neither installs nor supports political tyrants.
An uncontrolling God of love sends no one to eternal conscious torment (hell). The God who can’t stop evil singlehandedly is not culpable for failing to stop harm done to women, queer people, the disabled, or people of color. The uncontrolling but invisible Spirit doesn’t voluntarily hide. And a noncoercive deity can’t do miracles singlehandedly or answer prayer by fiat.
Rejecting Omnipotence Even Helps the Typical Arguments for God
The typical argument for God’s existence based on design, beauty, and order is especially compelling. But the lack of design, ugliness, and disorder are also realities. If God is omnipotent, we shouldn’t encounter so many flaws, unnecessary ugliness, and chaos. A Spirit who influences all but can’t control any, however, fits better the beauty and ugliness, design and randomness, order and chaos.
The claim that God is the source of our intuitions of value and the Standard of morality is strong. But an omnipotent God could provide clear answers to moral conundrums and solve disagreements about values. And yet good and wise people disagree. A Moral Source and Standard could exist, however, who is not omnipotent.
Conclusion
Reasons for and against God’s existence matter. The strongest and weakest make assumptions about God’s attributes and activities. Each reason assumes a particular kind of God.
The strongest reasons to deny God’s existence assume deity is or could be an omnipotent controller. The strongest reasons to believe reject omnipotence.