In this blog post, Alex presents a compelling case against theism, arguing that atheism provides a better explanation for divine hiddenness, geographical distribution of religious beliefs, and the existence of gratuitous suffering. Through personal experiences and philosophical reasoning, he challenges the notion of a loving God and highlights the inconsistencies within theistic beliefs.
My name is Alex, a graduate of philosophy and theology, and a YouTuber. In this discussion, I aim to present my case against the existence of a supernatural Creator, focusing on three main arguments that I believe demonstrate the viability of atheism over theism.
To begin, I want to address the phenomenon known as the problem of divine hiddenness. This concept refers to the idea that many individuals, despite their sincere desire to find God, experience a profound absence of divine presence. If a perfectly loving God exists, as many theists claim, then why do so many people fail to encounter Him?
Philosopher J.L. Schellenberg distinguishes between resistant and non-resistant non-belief. Resistant non-believers actively reject the idea of God, while non-resistant non-believers genuinely seek God but find no evidence of His existence. I identify as a non-resistant non-believer, having spent years searching for divine presence through various means, including prayer, theological study, and community engagement, yet finding nothing.
This leads to the conclusion that a loving God would not hide from those who earnestly seek Him. My experiences reflect a lack of divine response, raising the question of how theism can account for this reality.
The second argument I present concerns the geographical predictability of religious belief. The prevalence of different religions across various regions suggests that belief is significantly influenced by one's birthplace. For instance, a person born in Saudi Arabia is statistically more likely to be Muslim, while someone born in Thailand is more likely to be Buddhist.
This raises critical questions for theism:
If theism were true, one would expect a more uniform distribution of belief across the globe. Instead, the stark differences in religious adherence suggest that religion may be a cultural construct rather than a universal truth.
The third argument revolves around the existence of gratuitous suffering—suffering that appears unjustified or unnecessary. While some suffering can be rationalized as part of a greater plan, many instances of minor suffering seem devoid of purpose.
This argument extends beyond human suffering to include animal suffering, which poses an even greater challenge for theistic explanations. Animals do not possess free will and cannot morally develop, yet they experience immense suffering, raising questions about the nature of a benevolent Creator.
In summary, I have presented three arguments against theism: the problem of divine hiddenness, the geographical distribution of religious beliefs, and the existence of gratuitous suffering. Each of these points suggests that atheism provides a more coherent and plausible account of our reality than theism. I look forward to hearing counterarguments and engaging in further discussion on these critical issues.
