Bismiallah

5 standard arguments against existence of God and their appropriate responses:

Each of the below arguments are structured as such:

a. Atheist Argument: a generic contention negating the divine
b. Theist Response: an appropriate response and proof for the argument at hand using the
following standard template:
i. Bismiallah - I start in the name of God, Allah and testify that he is the only necessary
uncreated being who has always existed and always will exist.
ii. The argument presented suggests that God is not a sufficient answer to the creation of
universe. In that empirically backed proof following the scientific method is required
to understand God’s existence. This argument rests on the bed of philosophical
naturalism which implies that all observable physical processes are blind, irrational
and follow no planned direction. This is problematic as science itself assumes
rationality -
iii.
iv. human beings we must have empirical physical evidence for the creation of the
universe and everything within. This implies that

1. Philosophical Naturalism + Science Argument:

a. Atheist Argument: that the universe can be explained via natural laws/physical processes.
That God is a “cop out” (god of the gaps) and one should seek to understand their world
through empirical evidence – we may not know all the answers to our existence, but science
will eventually find the answer to the unanswered questions of creation
b. Theist Response: Bismiallah - I start in the name of God, Allah and testify he is the only
necessary uncreated being who has always existed and always will exist.

2. Assigning purpose/human construct/different god stories/creating imaginary friends/to control others

3. Concept of god doesn’t make sense/contradictory (rock)
4. Why is god hiding himself? If god wanted us to believe, why doesn’t everyone?
5. If god knows everything, then why would he create us? Why even do this whole thing?