The Human Limitations of Unreasonable Atheism (Part 10): “God Is Impossible”

I have an interesting book on my bookshelf entitled, The Impossibility of God, a collection of essays that go beyond claims of the mere improbability of God, arguing that “the weight of the evidence is against God’s actual existence,” and that “the concept of God is logically contradictory.” An impressive and weighty book, it contains “most of the important arguments for the impossibility of God that have been published since 1948.” The editors challenge readers to “think deeply and critically about” the idea of God and ask, is the idea of God beset with “an ocean of contradictions,” or “built upon the very idea that disproves it?”

The introduction gives a helpful summary of the types of “disproofs” presented in the book, including 1) “an inconsistency in the definition of God,” 2) the inconsistency of God’s existence with the existence of evil, 3) inconsistency between an attribute of God and biblical doctrines and events, 4) “inconsistency between two or more divine attributes,” and 5) an inconsistency within a single attribute ^[1] The authors present some impressive arguments and have thought “deeply and critically” about their topics. Moreover, the intellectual prowess displayed in the articles is impressive and humbling, a collection of brilliant essays by brilliant minds.

Achilles Heel
Every argument rests on assumptions. If the assumptions are false or unjustified, the most perfect argument built on them will also be false or unjustified. Thus, herein lies the fatal flaw of the many claims made in The Impossibility of God, they stand on significant but faulty assumptions of blind faith. And given the sophistication of the arguments, if these assumptions are accepted or remain unchallenged, the best Christian apologists will have difficulty refuting the assertions of the authors. And worse, those who “defend” the faith by conforming it to the unbelieving culture will not only struggle to answer the attacks, they will affirm unbelief, distort the truth, and be tempted to replace God’s glory with cheap and unbiblical caricatures. Thus, if we are to be adequately prepared to deal with highly sophisticated arguments against faith in Christ and Scripture, we need to easily identify the unjustified and blind faith assumptions on which they stand.

Some Groundwork
As a brief introduction to the next several articles, consider these simple questions: 1) Is God limited to the properties of the universe and our limited understanding of logic? A good many arguments against God’s existence assume that God, if He did exist, must be limited in the same way we are limited. But how can our finite perspective, experience, and reasoning determine this? 2) Can time and chance account for the immeasurable design, beauty, and order of life and every indispensable aspect of reality supporting it, including the intellect and reasoning of the authors? Ignoring the absurdity of the idea and its inconsistency with every known principle observed in the universe (i.e., chaos only produces more chaos), how could anyone know such a thing? And lastly, and the most basic question exposing the grand assumption under every atheistic argument, 3) Do atheists possess sufficient knowledge of transcendent realities to speak with authority about them? Can they reduce infinite spirit to calculations on a page or know what lies beyond the universe and the three or four dimensions of their existence? And dare I say it, do any of them know the contents of their neighbor’s garage without having a look? And if the answer to these simple questions is no, what qualifies them to speak of realities infinitely beyond their understanding, the greatest being God Himself?

Conclusion
In the next several articles we will examine the above categories of arguments and focus like a laser on their underlying assumptions. This is not to dismiss the importance of the details, but to prioritize them and demonstrate that regardless of their brilliance, they cannot support claims built on a false foundation. In the end, believers need not be intimidated by long and complex formulas, or by the erudition and number of opponents.