Originally Posted by Angelus-Mortis

I would like to add that omnipotence and omniscience aren't really things to be lauded at. They're not admirable, nor are they impressive; it lends itself no explanation the same way science and math do--at least if we were to know something from either field, there was a way in which we found such things, and that is the most delightful thing in both cases. There is nothing that explains God's supposed omniscience or omnipotence--the fact that he knows everything and can do everything tells us nothing about how he knows everything or can do everything. Of course, this is all assuming that omniscience and omnipotence are even remotely possible, which they aren't, at least not logically. Whoever wrote God to be omnipotent and omniscience obviously wanted to scare us into submission, or somehow make us awe in wonder of his might and intelligence, of which he displays very little of, particularly the latter. Of course, the problem is fear which prevents people from thinking rationally, and they don't always take the time to analyze the validity of God's omniscience and omnipotence, much less, the validity of omniscience and omnipotence themselves.

I personally have no admiration for God, for I have no admiration for characters, men, divine, or not, who destroy people in the most horrid and disgusting manners of all, and do it for the most disgusting reasons as well, and he destroys people, regardless of their innocence, blame people for things they didn't do, demand things they either don't deserve or are impossible to demand, and are hypocrites. It is readily apparent in the bible that God's character are all these things.

People say we have no right to judge God, but on what basis might they say that? Because they don't like the fact that a simple reading of the bible lends itself to the disgusting and atrocious character of God, and that, his word, if it were to be unambiguous, should be interpreted to be foul rather than loving and enlightening? And then people say that his word is tarnished because humanity translates it poorly, but I would say that this is a red herring for God to allow people to translate his words poorly, and yet, want people to see his words. There are so many ways to attack the argument of not being able to judge God that I can't even choose which one I want to decide. Well, here's another one. How about if no one is allowed to judge God, then when you suggest that God is unconditionally loving, are you not also judging God? To put any judgment on God is to characterize him as being something, and for no one to judge God would imply that he is not characterizable, and therefore, we know nothing about him. He might not even exist at all. Another argument is to suggest that we do not read the bible any differently from any other book we might read and trust it just because it is a book. We read the bible with the same criteria we read any other book because it would be arbitrary and illogical to read the bible differently from another book, and by the same logic and rationality that we determine what is practical and what is not practical we judge the bible--at the very least, logic and rationality are consistent and work. That much we know at least.

It's hilarious because there are so many reasons to reject the bible and religion. One being that most of the stuff written in holy texts are bullshit. No offense, but most of them say the same things because they're adapted from mythology, and mythology, as just about everyone should know, are made up explanations as to why the world operates the way it does--however, they are not adequate explanations, and most of them contradict scientific findings. Another reason to reject religion is the wars it has caused because of its ideals. Now I do not doubt that part of it may have been caused by the people wanting to fight over the land, but had their holy bible not suggested it, they'd have less of a reason to do it. I also reject it for the violence and the disgusting things they did to non believers. It is because of their intolerance that they ignored the Greek's discoveries in science and math for the longest time, labeling them as heathen, prosecuted people like Galileo and Copernicus for their scientific findings which happened not to agree with their bible--once again, I do not doubt that the people are to blame for acting on them, but they would have less of a reason to do so if the book they trusted so much had not said any of these violent or intolerable things such as the torturing and killing of heretics. But the biggest reason of all to reject the bible are the contradictions in them. You might not care about the social reasons to reject the bible, or perhaps the scientific reasons to reject the bible, but if you were to, it would be because of what the bible says itself. For the bible is riddled with contradictions, inconsistencies and repetitions, and the whole thing together just makes no sense. There are accounts of the same event being told more than once, and being told in ways so different that all of them could not have happened, and the writers of the accounts were not there to observe the events they supposedly wrote about--all of these things were written hundreds of years after they happened. The validity of such events, being written from such a long period of time away from when they actually happened (ie, these writers were not casual observers of the said events; they might have made up the events or heard it from hearsay less accurate than the actual observations themselves) is at question. But it is surely no small coincidence that there are so many reasons for rejecting the bible. Because there are many reasons for rejecting the bible, the probability that it might just have been true is significantly low.

As for perfection, it might imply omniscience and omnipotence, but because a perfect being is precisely that, he needs nothing else to satisfy him, and does not need to create humanity to satisfy himself. If he did, then perhaps he might not be considered perfect because a perfect being, having already attained perfection, does not desire anything more--including creating humanity.

My personal reasons for not believing in God are similar to my above sentiments. I would also like to add that I do not know with certainty whether or not God exists--but the evidence is very convincing, and the probability of his existence, very low. However, I can say with certainty that I do not believe in things I don't know exist, and therefore, I do not believe in God.