God as an Explanation vs. a God Who Acts in the World
This is a distinction that makes a difference. It also makes a great deal of sense. Believers think that if their concept of God can explain the cosmos then automatically ipso facto they have arrived at the God they believe in, who acted in the world. Nope. Not by a long shot. For a god might explain the cosmos and yet not be Yahweh. And even if Yahweh is that god, he might not have raised Jesus from the dead. And even if Yahweh raised Jesus from the dead, he might not be the classical theistic God of Anselm.
Skeptics do not think believers have shown that a God explanation is needed for the cosmos. We think it is an unnecessary hypothesis at best. So we need to see a God who acts in the world. We want evidence that he does. We want to see it. We want to see him do something verifiable, anything.
Christians will retort that their God did act by raising Jesus from the dead. But that was so long ago, in a superstitious pre-scientific era of the past. There is no way such an event can be verified with the historical tools available to us, as I wrote about here. Even if God did act in the historical past there is no way we can know that he did.
In any case, why doesn't God act now in any objective verifiable manner? I don't even have to say in advance what it would take for me to believe. God should already know. But he just doesn't do it. He supposedly knew what it took to convince Abraham, Moses, Gideon, Mary the mother of Jesus, John the Baptist's father, doubting Thomas, and Saul on the Damascus Road. He acted on their behalf. Doing so apparently did not abrogate their freedom. So why doesn't he act today?
The best explanation is that God is a figment of the imagination. He doesn't act because he doesn't exist. He is no different in this respect then the Flying Spaghetti Monster or the Invisible Pink Unicorn. Christians bristle at these comparisons, I know. But given that God is not a good explanation of the cosmos they are apt and well-deserved ones.
Skeptics do not think believers have shown that a God explanation is needed for the cosmos. We think it is an unnecessary hypothesis at best. So we need to see a God who acts in the world. We want evidence that he does. We want to see it. We want to see him do something verifiable, anything.
Christians will retort that their God did act by raising Jesus from the dead. But that was so long ago, in a superstitious pre-scientific era of the past. There is no way such an event can be verified with the historical tools available to us, as I wrote about here. Even if God did act in the historical past there is no way we can know that he did.
In any case, why doesn't God act now in any objective verifiable manner? I don't even have to say in advance what it would take for me to believe. God should already know. But he just doesn't do it. He supposedly knew what it took to convince Abraham, Moses, Gideon, Mary the mother of Jesus, John the Baptist's father, doubting Thomas, and Saul on the Damascus Road. He acted on their behalf. Doing so apparently did not abrogate their freedom. So why doesn't he act today?
The best explanation is that God is a figment of the imagination. He doesn't act because he doesn't exist. He is no different in this respect then the Flying Spaghetti Monster or the Invisible Pink Unicorn. Christians bristle at these comparisons, I know. But given that God is not a good explanation of the cosmos they are apt and well-deserved ones.