1.) Pascal's Wager: "If you're wrong, you'll go to hell. If I'm wrong, nothing will happen."
That's not how beliefs work. I genuinely don't think there's a god. I can't just pretend I do just in case something bad would happen to me otherwise. That would be lying, and if there was a god that existed in the way you describe, they would be able to tell that I was lying so it wouldn't make sense to go through the motions when I didn't actually believe. Also, many religions that contradict each other could use this argument. If you picked the wrong religion, by the logic of this argument, you wouldn't be any better off than Atheists.
If I'm wrong, nothing will happen because no god would ever punish someone for not being convinced of their existence. Even if there was a god like that, they would be an unethical god and should never be worshipped. It's not ok to punish someone for not believing in you and reward someone simply for believing in you. If you're wrong however, you've just spent your life being manipulated by an abusive and oppressive power structure instead of figuring out who you really are and what you would really believe in had you not been told so many lies. You may have wasted lots of time and money giving to the church and reading your religion's holy book or listening to preachers, or even going on missions to try to convert others. You may have spent lots of time feeling guilt because of the things your religion teaches you and stress from that guilt. If you're right, you've gained nothing because no god would ever reward someone simply for believing in them.
2.) "You're going to hell and it's all your fault for not choosing god."
Beliefs aren't things that you can choose. You can learn and become more educated and potentially change your beliefs with time, but you can't choose them like choosing a type of candy. Either you believe in something or you don't. I can't believe in a god no matter how hard I try because I'm genuinely convinced they don't exist. If they did exist and wanted to punish me for not being convinced of their existence, I would question why you worship such an unethical god that they would do something so horrible.
3.) "If you don't believe in heaven or hell, what do you think happens when we die?"
I think when we die, it's the same as before we are alive...as in, we don't exist anymore. And I think that makes this one life we have that much more precious and something to be cherished instead of taken for granted. I want to do as much good as I can in the short time I have.
4.) "If you don't think a god created us with a specific purpose, what do you think the point of life is?"
I think the point of life is to live it, to cherish it, and to do as much good that we can while we're here. To connect with our loved ones, engage in our hobbies and things that give us joy, watch younger generations grow up and gain independent lives, teach others what we know and learn from others too, and to keep growing as people. To form communities where we serve others and are served by others so that we can all survive and thrive. There doesn't have to be a specific being creating us with a specific purpose in life in order for us to live life to its fullest. We may not know all the answers but that doesn't mean we can't enjoy life and be good to each other.
5.) Intelligent Design/Complexity and "Because the world is so beautiful"
Intelligence, complexity, and beauty are in the eye of the beholder. They are opinions. Just because something seems intelligent or beautiful to you, doesn't mean it is. We all have things we view as incredibly beautiful, awe inspiring, or intelligent, but there are points where we disagree too. Even if we assume it is, just because something is intelligent or beautiful doesn't mean a god created it. Intelligence and beauty were created and changed with evolution. The world used to not even have the things many of us find intelligent or beautiful on it, such as plants and animals, including us.
Also, many of the things religious people assume are perfect and complex actually have many many flaws, such as the human body having very vulnerable important parts like the testicles exposed and easily able to be harmed. That is not an intelligent design at all. And even if we assume a god created something, that doesn't mean the god *you* believe in created it, as opposed to the thousands of gods humans have believed in that you don't believe in. Also, if an all powerful god wanted us to know they existed, we would all know very clearly and with zero doubts because they would make it obvious and wouldn't make us have to guess based off of indirect things like this. So either this god doesn't exist or they don't want people to believe in them.
6.) "There has to be a higher power/something bigger than us"
This doesn't have to be a god. I think the universe is that for us. There's so much going on all around our planet, and I think that's amazing. So many solar systems we haven't even begun to explore and so much expansion. Even our own ecosystem and animal kingdom are vast and amazing. Knowing that life started so many years before our species started existing is humbling. There is more to life than just us.
7.) God of the gaps: "I can't imagine it could have been anything else but a god, so it must have been a god."
It's better to admit that you don't know something than to assume the answer. There is a lot of awe and wonder in being curious and looking for the answer. It helps no one to pretend you already know when you don't and stop that curiosity. Just because you can't imagine what else could have created the universe but a god does not mean that a god created the universe. You just have to keep wondering and be ok with not knowing.
8.) "Everything needs a creator/the fact that we exist and everything around us exists is evidence of a god"
Atheists aren't saying a creator didn't create the universe, we're saying there's no evidence for a creator being a *being*. A creator could be anything, including events, such as the Big Bang or a potential event that created the Big Bang. Likewise, a creator of humans and other animals could be biological processes, such as evolution. Chemical reactions are creators too. When iron gets wet and is exposed to air, there is a chemical reaction that creates rust. Rust is a physical thing that you can see and feel, that is distinct from oxygen, iron, and water separately. Rust's creator is a chemical reaction, the chemical reaction that happens when iron (Fe), oxygen (O2), and water (H2O) all combine.
9.) "You just believe everything came from nothing."
No, and in fact that always sounded like what religious people believe to me (the idea that a god created everything out of nothing and/or was created out of nothing themselves). Atheists generally believe that there was something that created the universe but we don't exactly know what. That the big bang most likely created the expanse of the universe but we don't know for sure what came before the big bang or why this happened.
To sum it up, the big bang is when matter and energy were condensed a lot and then started expanding out at a rapid pace, called cosmic inflation. Some hypotheses are that some universes give way to other universes, or that universes constantly collapse and then expand again. The great thing about science is that we are forever learning and piecing things together with new information. I encourage everyone who is curious to delve into the subjects of the big bang, cosmic inflation, and scientific ideas about what created the universe, as well as how evolution works.
10.) "A god has to exist because it's outside of this realm/science"
That's just a shystery car salesman technique used to manipulate people into things. You could say that about anything, including other gods you don't believe in. For example, "Thor is real, and you can't say he isn't because he exists outside of the laws of science!" It also doesn't make sense to assume that someone can create things outside of the laws they work in. You couldn't create something that didn't abide by the laws of science, nor could you not abide by the laws of science yourself while having created something that did, for example.
11.) "If god doesn't exist, objective morality doesn't exist."
That's not true. Objective morality comes from having empathy, a conscience, and the ability to reason, which come from the brain and evolution. For example, you could say what is unethical is unethical even if someone claims it's not because empathy allows us to step inside of someone's shoes and know that we wouldn't want something to happen to us and therefore we shouldn't do it to others. The person who claims it is not unethical just isn't practicing empathy in that moment.
Also, a god can change their mind as they wish or be said to believe different things depending on the religion. Different gods can say different things about what is or isn't moral. So if you're following what a god says about morality, it is entirely subjective to a god's will. If a god were real and told people different things at different times, the morals would change, but that's not objectivity. If the bible had been written to say that homophobia is a sin, the same christians who are homophobic now would have been raised to believe that homophobia is immoral.
12.) "You don't have any morals."
Yes we do. Atheists have a tendency to care about morals a lot. Also, the morals from the Bible came from the morals of the communities that were around at the time, and are basic morals that the average person believes in. For instance, we too believe in "thou shall not kill" and "love thy neighbor." Also, this argument is counter-intuitive to the stereotype that Atheists are just a bunch of "woke people", given that "woke people" are known to care about morals a lot.
13.) "If you don't believe in a god, why don't you go around raping and killing everyone?" and "Where do your morals come from?"
Because morals don't come from doing something because someone else told you to. They come from empathy/having a conscience/the ability to reason. I have zero desire to go around raping or killing anyone. I don't need a god, religion, or prophet to tell me what to do or to tell me that these things are wrong. I am perfectly capable of understanding that all on my own.
Also, it scares Atheists for you to imply that the only thing stopping you from raping and killing us is a belief in a god. You too should have the ability to understand why those things are wrong outside of a god. You should have the ability to understand that if your god, prophet, religion, or holy text said that you should go around raping and killing everyone, that would be wrong and you shouldn't do those things. But hopefully you do and haven't just thought it through. It's not morality if you do good things to get rewarded and avoid bad things to avoid being punished. Morality is about doing good things because they are good and you want to help others, and avoiding bad things because they are bad and you don't want to hurt others.
14.) "You just want to sin"
No. I don't believe sinning is a thing, and I don't want to do many of the things you call sins. I believe in being an ethical person. You can want to sin and believe in a god, and not want to do bad things and not believe in a god. Also, this is counter-intuitive to the idea that everyone is a sinner. Christians and other religious folks do what you call "sinning" all the time, so why say this only about Atheists not believing in a god?
15.) "You just hate god."
No. I don't believe in any god. It makes no sense to assume that people just hate a character they don't believe in because you're that afraid of admitting that not everyone is convinced of their existence. I get that it's hard to be so used to the idea of a god that you can't fathom someone genuinely not believing in them, but it's true, we genuinely don't believe in your god for the same reasons you genuinely don't believe in the thousands of other gods that people have believed in.
16.) "It says so in the bible"
Assuming that things written in a book are automatically true simply because it says so in the book is circular logic and makes no sense. Especially if you try to use some historical events that happen to be written down in said book for justification as to why everything in the book is true when it's clear that the authors were just adding in things they were experiencing or knew about and used them as inspiration to create fantastical stories like all storybook writers do. This would be like assuming that The Hunger Games is true because it's all written down in The Hunger Games, and then looking at current societal collapse in different areas to say that that's evidence that we should abide by everything else in it.
The bible is the claim. It is not the evidence. If you think the bible is true, you have to go outside of the bible to prove why it is true, and your evidence can't include things that all other story books do, such as basing characters off of real people or including real events. That is just how fiction tends to be written. That the character of Jesus may (or may not) have been based off of a real person (named Yeshua) cannot be used as a reason to say that the bible is real, because most fiction books base characters off of real people.
The bible was put together in such a way and reads in such a way that it was never trying to be taken literally in the first place. It is a random collection of letters, stories, non eyewitness accounts, poems, and historical and legal documents. They were debated, cherry picked, refined, and retranslated in several different languages over and over again, thereby losing a lot of things in translation, and put together hundreds of years after Jesus was said to have existed. A lot of things were left out or altered on purpose. In fact there is a consensus by both secular and christian scholars that the *earliest* accounts in the new testament were written by anonymous individuals 40 to 60 years after Jesus was said to have died. It contains no eyewitness accounts. It does a disservice to the bible to see it as a literal book of nonfiction.
The writers, who weren't Jesus or god themselves or the 12 apostles but rather people who existed well after Jesus was said to have died, knew that it wasn't literal because that's not how people wrote back then. In response to Cenk Uygur saying the phrase "Even if he existed, who cares they made up all this stuff", the Professor and Christian Theologian Reza Aslan stated,
"Well made up is the wrong way to think about it. I mean look, what you and I call history, the accumulation of facts and dates that are empirically verifiable, is totally a product of the modern age. I mean that definition of history is like 300 years old at most. The ancient mind would have no idea what you mean when you talk that way. They were not interested in revealing facts, they were interested in revealing truths. So you wouldn't want to think about the gospels as false because that's the wrong way to think about it. They wouldn't even understand what you mean.
Let me give you a perfect metaphor to understand how to read the gospels and how they were actually written. So again, this is not about revealing facts, it's about revealing truths. What you want to do is say something true about a person by putting it in the guise of a story. That's what the gospels are, that's what the ancient mind understood these kinds of kind of quote unquote "historical writing". So if I wanted to say something about some guy named Joe, I wanted to say he was a really giving and compassionate person, this is what I would say, "One day Joe walked outside, it was freezing cold, he saw a homeless man on the street without a shirt on, so he took off his own shirt and gave it to the homeless man and walked on." Now did Joe actually do that? Maybe he did, maybe he didn't, but the question is irrelevant to the ancient mind because you missed the entire point of the story. The point is that Joe is the kind of guy who would take his shirt off of his own back and give it to you. That's how the gospels were written."
He has also said elsewhere, "We assume that biblical literalism, the notion that the Bible is literal and inerrant, is just sort of an inherent part of belief in the Bible. It isn't. The concept of biblical literalism in the 2,000 year history of the New Testament is a little more than 100 years old." "It was the result of a very interesting movement, a backlash to Christian liberalism and the Scientific Revolution at the end of the 19th century … by a group of American Protestants who began a movement that was launched by a series of tracts that were written called ‘The Fundamentals’ and that is where we get the term ‘fundamentalism’ from. It’s a very new phenomenon.” He also claims the Gospels are filled with "historical errors and with contradictions ... The gospel of Matthew says that Jesus was born in 4 B.C. The gospel of Luke says Jesus was born in 6 A.D. That's 10 years difference! Which one was right?"
What Reza means by all of this is that the writers of the bible were specifically trying to write a book of what we today in modern times would label as fairytale stories that just may have morals behind them. When Jesus's actions or sayings are quoted, they're not saying he actually did those things, they're either just saying that some of these things are perhaps a good way to live your life, or they're trying to create a story surrounding the idea of living your life that way. They may have been based off of a man who existed and had some philosophies about the world and they were trying to show those philosophies through these stories, or they may have been just pulling from certain morals that existed in the community and created a character out of them to show them.
17.) "You just have to read the bible in context."
No one can ever agree on what the context is or what the bible is really trying to say. I've watched christians constantly disagree with each other on what the bible is saying for years. There are many, many contradictions in the bible. You can see some of them here: https://www.lyingforjesus.org/Bible-Contradictions/ If it takes this much work to understand a piece of writing, it's not worth it to read or take seriously. Not to mention again that the bible was written by humans hundreds of years after the things in it supposedly went down and retranslated over and over again. Naturally, a lot would have been lost in translation, which means it shouldn't be taken seriously. At most it should be viewed as a book of stories, not something to live by as the end all be all.
18.) "Well if you really don't believe in hell or a god or the bible, why do you talk about these things/why do you care if I say you'll burn in hell?"
Because I genuinely believe that these things are used to dominate and control people, and as you folks say, I think you deserve to be saved. Just because I don't believe there's even a hell for me to go to doesn't mean I think it's fine to sit back and watch children get threatened with hell so that they will do what people say, or that it's fine if vulnerable people are told that the way to save themselves is to buy into what a religion is selling. I think being a good person means speaking out on what we see as wrong. I see coercing people into religion as wrong.
19.) "If people feel comforted by the idea of a god and need religion to get by in life when things are hard, what's the harm in that?"
I think there are healthier ways to do that. The reason religion is called "the opium of the people" is because it is something that spreads like an addiction when people are down and is used to numb people. I think religion preys on the vulnerable by using people's hard life circumstances (such as addiction, homelessness, prison sentences, breakups, grief, trauma etc. or even just being young and naive) to convince them that things that aren't true actually are, because that's how religion survives. Without this method of coercion, religion could never exist in the modern age as people would understand it as a collection of delusions. Religion is based off of things that would not be of sound mind to believe if people were to come to them themselves individually, so using coercion and preying on the vulnerable as a way to convince people of them is particularly evil and makes religious folks victims of a form of cultural abuse. One that often mimics mentally/emotionally abusive relationships in many different ways.
Because of that, it is an oppressive power structure. This is why every religious conversion story starts with someone talking about how hard their life was but then they found christ/religion. I believe these people deserve better than to be used by the religious hierarchy as tools to spread what they are trying to sell to the masses. No one deserves to be exploited like that. It's also a band-aid solution that doesn't get to the root of their problems. Often they need actual therapy, not religion.
20.) "I had a religious experience/witnessed a miracle/witnessed something paranormal"
When it comes to feeling a sense of awe in a moment and thinking of it as a religious experience, that doesn't mean that there is a god. It is part of being a human and an animal to have moments of stillness or a sense of mind-blowing awe or comfort. People tend to experience this when listening to music, because music is good at healing and making people feel great in the moment. This is why people at christian music concerts may think they feel a god's presence. It's just how the human brain reacts to music. The same goes for worship services. Sometimes it's people looking for answers, not knowing what the answers are but being tired of searching, and settling for the idea of a god and feeling good about it because of the ease of thinking you found an answer.
There are lots of coincidences that have happened in the world. For instance, someone may have become conscious after falling unconscious and an EMT did chest compressions on them, even after someone said "Please God save them". Someone may have been held up at gunpoint and then the person got startled by something and ran away. Good things happening, and things that happen coincidentally, are not evidence of a god.
A lot of times the brain plays tricks on us. We think we hear things or see things that aren't there, or mishear things and our brains fill in the gaps. There are also times where technology is turned on or off by electricity spurts. There are sound waves that can sound eerie. There are also times where we hallucinate because we are tired, dehydrated, hungry, on medication, or stressed out. None of these things mean there is anything paranormal happening.
There are times where people's consciences and gut feelings tell them to do something, and they attribute that to a god. One may feel like their partner cheated on them because they acted nervous and suspicious, and they may say "God told me something was wrong, so I dug deeper and found evidence he was cheating." This doesn't mean there is a god. This is another basic human feeling.
21.) "Religious people are trying to proselytize to you to save you because we genuinely believe your soul is in danger/you are going to hell"
The same goes for Atheists, in a sense. We genuinely believe you are being harmed by religion and need to be saved from it. We believe it is an exploitative industry that is using you as a pawn to gain money and gain cult followers to blindly do what it says. The difference is that there is a huge double standard here, because there is a lot more hatred toward Atheists, to the point where we essentially aren't allowed to proselytize to people.
If we try to save you, we will get stopped at best and hate crimed at worst. We could be killed for it, lose our jobs for it, go to jail for it in certain countries etc. In fact a lot of Atheists feel like they have to be closeted because it is unsafe to be an out Atheist. So if you believe it is ok for a religious person to proselytize on the basis that they are trying to genuinely save our souls, you should be equally ok with Atheists trying to proselytize to religious people because we are genuinely trying to save you from being harmed by religion.
22.) "If evolution is true, why are there still monkeys?"/"Evolution can't be true because my mother wasn't a monkey."
Evolution isn't saying that your mother was a monkey or that we came from monkeys. It's saying that several hundred thousand years ago (or tens of thousands of generations ago), there was another species that was very similar to our own that essentially birthed ours, so to speak. And that several hundred thousand years before that, there was another similar species that birthed them. And so on down the line. And that we didn't come from monkeys, but rather we came from a species that monkeys also came from. That species doesn't exist anymore.
You also don't have to believe in a god just because you have skepticism about evolution. It's perfectly healthy to question things, even evolution. But it is important to learn about things like evolution so that you can actually know what they are saying before you throw the whole concept out. There is a lot of misunderstanding about what evolution is. Evolution works by way of lots of genetic abnormalities packing on top of each other over time.
When sex cells reproduce to create the next generation, sometimes there is a mistake, called a mutation, when creating the genetic code. This leads to the child having a different fur color, or eye color, or length or number of limbs etc. If this genetic mutation proves to be advantageous, (as in, if it helps the kid adapt to their environment so that they can continue to live and reproduce) or even if they just happen to make it to the point where they can reproduce anyway, they can pass those genes on. Over time, the genetic mutations that are advantageous spread throughout the population, and different genetic mutations that are now in the DNA of modern generations compile with each other to the point where they are no longer the same species as those who came well before them thousands to millions of years prior. I think the modern version of the TV show Cosmos does a great job at explaining this, which you can see here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I5lTZ0bfqqI
23.) "You must be a grumpy crotchety person who hates life and is miserable and had trauma in your childhood and that's why you're Atheist. Or you're trying to rebel."
That's not true. It's just a weird stereotype religious people made up to try to scare people out of questioning religion. I'm only an Atheist because there's no evidence for a god. That's it. If there was any actual evidence for a god, I would believe in said god. Everything religious folks have told me in regards to what they think is evidence has remained totally unconvincing to me. And I don't lack happiness and joy just because I'm Atheist. There are lots of amazing things in this world. Lots of things inspire me and give me joy, Atheism included.
24.) "You must not believe in anything."
That's also not true. I believe in love, compassion, humanity, friendship, nature and music to uplift your spirit, and many other things. I also have various political beliefs, as we all do. I also believe it's good to learn about things, like science, history, math etc. and I believe having hobbies is good for one's sense of identity. I just don't believe in a god.
25.) "You must not have truly been religious."
*I* personally do say that I was never religious despite not being raised as an Atheist because I don't think it's even remotely possible for a little kid to be religious, and by the time I was old enough to start understanding the concepts of religion and gods when I was about 12 or 13, I realized I didn't think any of it was real and came out as an Atheist. But there are lots of Atheists who were genuinely religious as they got older, just as much as you. In fact most of them were. We're talking people who read the holy book, went to church regularly, prayed, worshipped the gods and prophets and believed the stories were real etc. In fact, lots of Atheists were once religious clergy. The Clergy Project is a wonderful organization that helps closeted Atheists transition out of being religious leaders. Lots of them feel like they have to keep going in that work even though they don't believe in a god because it's all they've ever known so they don't know how else to put food on the table for themselves and their families. Who knows, your place of worship might have leaders in it that are secretly Atheist.
26.) "You must worship satan!"
I don't. I don't believe in satan. I don't think there's any sort of antagonist to a god just like I don't think there is any sort of god. I don't think any of those characters are real.
27.) "Well you can't prove god doesn't exist."
Think of all the reasons you don't believe in any of the other thousands of gods people have believed in. What are your reasons for not believing in them? Those are my reasons for not believing in the god you happen to believe in. What would your response be if someone told you "Well you can't prove this god doesn't exist" in reference to those gods? There's your answer. I don't think it makes sense to believe in a god just because someone else thinks they can't be disproven. That would have to be applied to everything and I think most people would quickly see how bad of an argument it is if it were taken to its logical conclusion. I also don't believe they can't be disproven anyway. We can disprove characters and concepts with science, logic, and reason.
28.) "You just have to have faith/let god into your heart"
I believe the question of how the universe was created is far too important of a question to leave up to the concept of faith or blind acceptance. I think it's something that needs factual evidence. In fact, it's a scientific question, that requires the scientific method in order to answer. I think it's important to think critically, especially about things that make huge claims like that.
29.) "Atheism is a religion."
No, Atheism is the lack of a belief in a god. It has no other qualities. It doesn't have anything else to it. It's not a grouping of rules. It's the lack of religion. It's the inverse of religion. Calling it a religion would be like calling not liking politics a political party. And if you really thought it was a religion, why are you more against it than all of the actual religions?
30.) "My religion must be true because I have a strong testimony."
So do I about Atheism, and so does everyone else in the various other religions about their religion. There are lots of people who are equally as convinced that their religion is true as you are that yours is true. You being sure of something doesn't mean it's true. I have been 100% sure that there is no god for over 20 years. Don't get me wrong, if there were any actual evidence for a god, I would believe in them. I probably wouldn't worship them because I don't think the concept of worship is ethical as it is a type of extreme control, but I would say that I thought they were real. But I have had so many experiences over the years and endless conversations with all sorts of religious folks that I am thoroughly convinced that there is no god. As some would say, I have an unshakeable testimony.
I have gone through every argument I can find, binge watched videos on religious arguments, purposefully sought out so many hundreds to thousands of religious people to speak to about religion, and heard endless people absolutely swear up and down that once I talked to them, I would be convinced that their god was real, to no avail. So if I'm so sure I'm right that there is no god and this hasn't changed no matter what people say because no matter how convinced a religious person is that they can get me to believe, I can always point to how their arguments aren't logical and are unconvincing, how are you so sure that your testimony makes a difference or means that you are right? Could it be that it just never occurred to you that people on the opposite side would equally be as convinced and feel the exact same feelings you do?
31.) "Without religion, how can you have a sense of community?"
You don't need religion for community. Volunteering is a great way to have a sense of community, because you're directly helping the community and often getting to connect with the community members you are helping, plus connecting with community members who are volunteering with you. Doing hobbies with like-minded individuals is another way to have community. There are lots of hobbies that can be done with people, such as outdoorsy things like hiking or canoeing, going to concerts or playing in a band, taking pottery or cooking classes etc. You can even form meetup groups specifically to make sure you are able to have a group to do these things with.
Having get-togethers with your neighbors is another way to have community, such as having block parties, BBQs, or even just making an effort to check in with each other and/or hang out every week. You can also live with a bunch of roommates, or join community housing projects. Some of them are set up as a big house with lots of people living there, and others are a bunch of houses built with community in mind where they all share land and community gardens and hang out in a common building in the center. There are also Atheist churches in certain areas, where community members get together to discuss different topics, enjoy refreshments, and connect with each other.
32.) You're only an Atheist because you don't understand the concept of free will and are mad at god for the suffering in the world.
No. When Atheists talk about things like suffering, we're not saying we see the suffering in the world, get mad at this god, and that's the end all be all of why we're Atheist. We're Atheist because there's no evidence for a being-creator. We're bringing these things up as a response to the idea that a god is all-knowing (omniscient), all-powerful (omnipotent), all-good and all-loving (omnibenevolent), and all-present (omnipresent), and as a critique of the personality of this character and to help you question why you worship someone like that.
If a being is all knowing, all powerful, always present, and created everyone with free will, this means that a god knows that people will hurt and kill each other but is fine with this happening and doesn't want to do anything to stop it. If I had these abilities, if I had the knowledge that people were going to hurt and kill each other and I was all powerful and therefore had the ability to stop them, I would. If I was all powerful and had the ability to stop cancer from existing, I would. If I had the ability to give children terminal illnesses, I wouldn't. If I had the ability to cure them, I would. If I had the ability to stop natural disasters from happening, I would.
For a god that is actually all powerful, free will doesn't have to be unrestricted as they could just give people the free will to do non-harmful things. Unrestricted free will is nowhere near as important as stopping bad things from happening. It's important to allow people to do what they want as long as they don't hurt anyone else so I'm not against free will that doesn't harm others, but an all powerful god would obviously have the power to stop people from hurting each other but just chooses not to. This would make them devoid of empathy and therefore not worthy of being worshipped. If this god exists, either they aren't all knowing and all powerful, or they aren't omnibenevolent and wouldn't be ethical enough to worship. Even if I believed this god existed, I wouldn't worship them.
But I think it's much more likely that they just don't exist in the first place, as the idea of an all knowing and all powerful god that decided to cause natural disasters and diseases, and didn't stop people from hurting each other due to the flimsy excuse of wanting everyone to be able to do whatever they want no matter how much destruction and death is caused, is completely illogical and harmful. I don't believe that any god who had the ability to stop bad things from happening would just sit back and watch as they happened and then say, "Well I gave them free will" or, "I was testing them" or, "I had a plan" as an excuse. That's a pretty bad argument all around whether you're trying to argue for a god's existence or trying to argue why someone should worship them.
Also, given that lots of animal species have gone extinct, it doesn't make sense for a god to create beings only for them to go extinct due to humans harming them or due to mother nature making it hard for them to survive. Why create a species if you know that humans will hunt them to death or cause habitat loss but you also don't want to do anything about it? Humans ourselves are set to start declining in numbers by the 2070s, if not earlier. There's a very real possibility that we will go extinct in the next few hundred years or so. But a god that supports free will even if it harms others won't stop us from going extinct either.
33.) Jesus died for our sins
It doesn't even remotely make sense for a god to kill his son to atone for the sins of humans. No one can die for your sins. Even if this were true, why would you want to worship a god that had such wrath at humanity for how they created us that they are willing to murder their son over it just to love us again and send us to heaven? And why would you want anyone to die for you? I certainly wouldn't feel right about someone dying for my sins if I believed that. I don't want anyone to be sacrificed like that because I have empathy. I wouldn't trust a god who was willing to kill someone for me. Sacrificing your son for others isn't love, it's sociopathy and control. If I were sent to heaven because someone died for my sins, I would feel like the whole experience was tainted.
The idea that sin was created because Adam and Eve chose to disobey god, especially by eating from a tree called the tree of knowledge, is very obviously a fear mongering way to get people to blindly follow the rules of a religion and not think for themselves, much like a parent might tell their child that if they don't brush their teeth and go to bed, a monster will eat them. Everything about the concept of sin exists as a form of extreme control to get people to do what this religion says you should. It suspends individuality, as the concept of what is or isn't a sin can be twisted. This is why harmless things like sex before marriage are said to be sins, with people grasping at straws trying to find ways to justify why that is a sin, while things that are actually bad such as murder are also sins (except when this god does it apparently, which is hypocritical.)
The concept of making this god seem so benevolent by saying "see but he loves us so much that he is willing to forgive our sins by sacrificing his son" is an abuse tactic similar to ones often used to control people in relationships. Abusive partners often say things like, "I love you so much that I'm not going to hit you for disobeying me. You should thank me for that." Imagine if they took it a step further and said that they were going to kill their puppy to forgive you for disobeying them and so that you can stay together forever, and that meant that they loved you so much because they were willing to do something as big as sacrifice their puppy for you. That would be pretty scary and illogical wouldn't it?
34.) Doesn't it make you feel good to know that bad people are sent to hell?
No. Even if I believed in a hell, because I have empathy and a conscience, I don't want anyone to go to a hell, and I wouldn't feel right existing in a heaven if others were being tortured in a hell. This is why some people say that heaven is for sociopaths. To exist in an afterlife where you are meant to be experiencing eternal joy, while others are experiencing eternal suffering, means you have to suspend empathy. How can one have a good time in heaven and experience bliss while knowing that others are in agony? And religious people don't typically claim to know definitively who is going to hell, with people most often saying that that is for their god to judge. So even if it were to exist, it may not just be for the worst murderers and child molesters. What if a couple who had sex before marriage were sent to hell? Why would I want to be in heaven knowing that others who did something harmless were sent to hell? What if some of your loved ones are there? Even for people who did something harmful, it's normal to have some level of empathy for them and not think that hell is an appropriate response to what they did.
Even for people who say that hell isn't a place of eternal torture but just not being in heaven, why would you want to believe in or worship a god that would withhold something that is supposed to be special and amazing from people just because of things like not being convinced of their existence, having sex before marriage, gambling etc.? I still wouldn't worship a god like that even if I thought they existed, but even if I believed in a god, I wouldn't believe that any god would act in such ways in the first place because that would still be too spiteful.
Tips: An easy way to understand if your religious argument is bad or not is to picture someone else who believes in a different god/religion asking you the same thing about their god/religion. If that argument wouldn't cause you to switch to believing in their god/religion, then you should consider throwing the argument out.
Another good thought process is to ask yourself these questions:
*"If I had never heard of the concepts of religion or god until now, would I believe in them?"
*"If so, would I believe in the exact same god and religion that I currently believe in, or different ones?"
*"If my parents had raised me in a different religion, would I believe in that religion now, or would I reject that family religion in favor of the one I currently believe in?"
*"If no one had created my religion yet, would I create it, and exactly as it is now?"
*"If no one on earth was religious, would I be?"
These are questions meant to help you figure out if your religion is right for you, or if it's something you're going with because it's culturally easier to believe in it than something else or no religion at all.
