Strong argument against Atheism? Weak Argument?

[Entwhistler]

I found this argument, and I’ve been wondering how strong (or weak) it is. This is not a main argument. It is more of a side argument (and quite amusing at that).

If you are an atheist, you claim God does not exist.
If you claim God does not exist, you claim he does not exist anywhere in reality.
If you claim God does not exist anywhere in reality, you claim to know all of reality.
If you claim to know all of reality, you claim you are omniscient.
If you claim you are omniscient, you claim you are God.
If you claim you are God, you claim God exists.
Thus, if you are an atheists, you claim God exists.

I find three potential problems with it so far. One being that is not what Atheists believe (or…don’t believe?).
Another being God is not the only omniscient being in the universe.
And the third is the most formidable. It basically states that you do not have to know something is 100% true to believe it is true. I do not have to know with certainty that God does not exist in any part of reality. I just have to know only 99% of reality (or, more realistically, greater than 50%)

So, do those three potential arguments hold any weight? Any more potential arguments or is the original argument the best ever and everyone is convinced?

 

[Bradski]

And the third is the most formidable. It basically states that you do not have to know something is 100% true to believe it is true. I do not have to know with certainty that God does not exist in any part of reality. I just have to know only 99% of reality (or, more realistically, greater than 50%)

That’s pretty much it.

You can’t believe (or not believe) something without evidence. Discounting revelation, everyone has access to the same information about God. Christians find it credible and atheists don’t.

Which one is right (both may be wrong) isn’t relevant to the fact that both are quite entitled to say that they believe, or do not believe, based on that evidence.

There is a difference in that most atheists do not say: ‘God doesn’t exist’. That would, strictly speaking, require one to have knowledge of things which are not accessible to us. So an atheist (at least this one) says: ‘I don’t believe God exists’ on the understanding that a fuller version would have a lot more conditional statements (as far as I know…from the information I have been given…).

Christians (at least all the ones that I know) haven’t got that option. You can’t be a Christian and ‘sort of’ believe in God. It’s an all or nothing concept. That’s where faith comes in handy, I guess.

 

[Techno2000]

Christians (at least all the ones that I know) haven’t got that option. You can’t be a Christian and ‘sort of’ believe in God. It’s an all or nothing concept. That’s where faith comes in handy, I guess.

Jesus Heals a Boy with an Evil Spirit

And Jesus said to him, “‘If You can?’ All things are possible to him who believes.” Immediately the boy’s father cried out and said, “I do believe; help my unbelief.”

 

[Rhubarb]

The problems you’ve pointed out are pretty solid objections to the argument. If God, then omniscient doesn’t get you If omniscient, then God. That’s just a point of logic. The conceptual problem you pointed out about knowledge would seal the argument’s fate thoroughly. If the argument were to succeed, then one is obligated to believe that knowledge must be doubtless - or as epistemologists say, infallible. Infalliblists run into huge problems down the line, and it’s very unpopular in knowledge theory these days.

 

[Boccherini]

As you say, atheists don’t claim that they 100% know that God doesn’t exist, they just think it’s implausible for a variety of reasons. Look up Russell’s teapot – that’s how many atheists would think about God.

 

[Just_Lurking]

It’s often easier to spot the mistakes in a proof when the proof is of something that isn’t true. So find the mistake:

If you are a Christian, you claim the Flying Spaghetti Monster (FSM) does not exist.
If you claim the FSM does not exist, you claim he does not exist anywhere in reality.
If you claim the FSM does not exist anywhere in reality, you claim to know all of reality.
If you claim to know all of reality, you claim you are omniscient.
If you claim you are omniscient, you claim you are God.
If you claim you are God, you are committing the same sin that Lucifer did.
Thus, if you are a Christian, you are going to Hell.

 

[Entwhistler]

It’s often easier to spot the mistakes in a proof when the proof is of something that isn’t true.

True, and reversing the argument into something you don’t agree with can help sometimes as well. However, it is often hard to find something that would logically fit into the original argument.