It's all about the deep questions.
The truth or falsity of theism has always been an issue close to my heart since I was raised in a theistic family. In this series of posts I will try to back up my current position that theism is false. Naturally, I will probably make some mistakes in my evaluation of the philosophical arguments, but i have read extensively on each of them and stand firmly by my current opinion of them. Of course though, I am always open to new evidence. Now, in order to argue for or against theism, first one has to understand what it entails. Here, I will take it to be that to be a theist one must believe in the existence of an orthodoxly conceived monotheistic god. This god, as it has been orthodoxly conceived, has the properties of being:
(a) perfect (g) personal
(b) immutable (h) free
(c) necessary (i) omnibenevolent
(d) non-physical (j) all-just
(e) omniscient (k) all-merciful
(f) omnipotent (l) the creator of the universe
My central underlying assumption is that to believe in something, one must have appropriate evidence for that belief. If one wants one’s beliefs to be true, one should follow this rule of thumb. These posts will attempt to argue that if one sticks to wherever the evidence pulls one, one will not end up being a theist. In the spirit of this, I will launch directly into the philosophical arguments for and against the existence of god.