I haven’t blogged for months and that’s mainly because I’m sick of refuting theism and religion. I just don’t have the time and interest in blogging anymore, so I’m taking a longer break. I could occasionally post an argument that I’m thinking of, but I don’t know how many times I’ll do it. If you want to follow me in any form you can follow me on Twitter as this is the only place I am still active. Just click the Twitter link on the right.
I made a simple argument there recently:
1. The Christian God is eternal and trinitarian in nature.
2. If a god is logically possible, it is logically possible that there is a god that is not eternal and in itself trinitarian.
3. Therefore, the eternal, intrinsic, trinitarian nature of the Christian God is dependent.
– The Thinker (@AtheismNTheCity) March 31, 2020
This argument shows that the trinitarian nature of the Christian God is not logically necessary and therefore the existence of the Christian God is not logically necessary. Since it is logically possible that another (non-Trinitarian) god exists, such a god is not necessary. This is the same logic that theists use when they claim that the universe could have been different, and is therefore not necessary. What sauce is for the goose is sauce for the viewer!
One could argue that it is not God logical but is necessary metaphysical instead necessary. But I could make the same argument about the universe. (And I did.) Once you acknowledge that God is not logically necessary, you cannot argue metaphysically without allowing the atheist to make the same argument about the universe. I really hope that most atheists and theists understand this because most of them are not currently doing so.
Note: We are not the author of this content. For the Authentic and complete version,
Check its Original Source