Difference between revisions of "Argument from inconsistent revelations"

From Religions Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 26: Line 26:
* [[Christians disagree over everything]]
* [[Christians disagree over everything]]
* [[Outsider test]]
* [[Outsider test]]
{{Arguments against god}}
{{Arguments against god}}

Revision as of 15:15, 20 April 2016

The Argument from inconsistent revelations is based upon the many number of interpretations of holy texts and scripture. If scripture was revealed to man by God and God is infallible, then all revelations would be the same, inerrant text (notwithstanding necessary linguistic and, perhaps, cultural differences).

But contradictions and vagaries still remain in the Bible and the holy texts of other religions. As a result, there are many different groups of people with many different interpretations.

Thus, God cannot exist in the sense that Christians claim, because his own writings betray his capacity for error — or betray his non-existence. Either God is fallible, or humans wrote the Bible and God was not involved. Needless to say, Christians don't like either of those possibilities.

"[There] is a lack of agreement among believers. If there is a deity that you love and care about, why do no two believers agree on any social or moral issue? You name it: gay marriage, doctor assisted suicide, stem cell research, the war, these social issues we are struggle with. You find devote, praying, Bible believing Christians on both sides of those issues. Paul wrote in the Bible 'God is not the author of confusion'. But can you think of a single book that has caused more confusion than that Bible? [...] Why shouldn't it be clear? Why shouldn't this all powerful and all loving deity make it clear to us? It is not."

Dan Barker[1]

Argument from existence of atheists

Main article: Argument from nonbelief

Closely related is the argument from existence of atheists:

  1. God is omniscient.
  2. God is omnipotent.
  3. God wants everyone to believe in him, Christians, especially those who set out to evangelize generally assume this.
  4. Since God is omniscient, he knows exactly what demonstration would convince any given person that he exists.
  5. Since God is omnipotent, he is capable of performing this demonstration.
  6. Since God wants everyone to believe in him, he wants to perform this demonstration.
  7. However, atheists manifestly exist.
  8. Therefore, the god described by the first three conditions does not exist.

Of course, an apologist could reply to this by saying that atheists do know that God exists but are just denying him out of stubbornness. Indeed, this response has been used many times by different apologists. Admittedly, some non-believers do disbelieve simply out of stubbornness, but most have good reasons for their disbelief, and thus this response isn't an effective one.

See also


v · d Arguments against the existence of god
Existential arguments   Argument from nonbelief · Problem of Evil (logical) . Who created God? · Turtles all the way down · Problem of non-God objects · Argument from incompatible attributes · No-reason argument · Santa Claus argument · Can God create a rock so heavy that he can't lift it? · Outsider test
Arguments from the Bible   Failed prophecy in the Bible · Biblical contradictions
Evidentiary arguments   Problem of evil (evidential) · Inefficacy of prayer
Reasonableness arguments   Occam's Razor · Outsider test · Argument from locality · Argument from inconsistent revelations
Other arguments   Emotional pleas