- Is the Resurrection Unbelievable?
- The Cross-Cultural Cross
- Feser – The Two Cartesian Worlds
- Bricks of Salt in the Hands of Believers
- An Objection to Religious Faith
This is the title of a reddit post which presents a fascinating and original argument against God. It contains some premises that many Christians will be reluctant to accept, but given my particular idiosyncratic ontology and philosophy of mind, it does seem to be effective against me. Unless I can come up with a good response, I may be forced to change some of my beliefs. But it is early days yet. Here is the argument:
- P1: God exists and is omniscient.
- P2: Omniscience entails fully detailed, perfect knowledge/representation of everything.
- P3: “Everything” includes all “possible/hypothetical worlds” (if this is not true, God can’t entertain counterfactuals, which is a pretty weird hole in omniscience).
- P4: These possible/hypothetical worlds would be known in full, perfect detail/representation (P2)
- P5: A perfect representation of a person would experience itself as an actual person with consciousness (like a simulation or “matrix”).
- P6: Some portion of these worlds contain holy books telling them that God has such and such plans for it and the people within (P3).
- P7: Some percentage of the worlds in P6 in which a given person experiences going to hell, or just living on forever in their body, in whatever sorry state they died in, and every other possible afterlife. Regardless of what they did in life (P3).
- P8: There are more undesirable afterlives than desirable ones, as there are more ways for something to be miserable or suffering-inducing than for them to be perfect and happy.
- P9: There is no way to determine whether one is in the specific world God created (if he even created any), or instead exists within a “simulation world” (P5 & P6).
- P10: There are more “hypothetical/possible” worlds than actual, specifically created ones (trivially true unless he creates all of them, in which case the conclusion is still valid).
I give some suggestions towards a response in the thread, but I am not yet convinced I have a good response. Probably there is something simple which I am missing, but I thought I’d share it to praise it for being original, and to get the opportunity to hear other people’s opinions on it.