It is so blame easy to disprove the existence of God *. Atheists do it all the time, and no one could deny their success with it. They can show—and they’re exactly right!—that if God* existed, then…
- God* would parade down Broadway in the Macy’s Thanksgiving Parade.
- God* would make the moon sprout legs and do a moonwalk.
- God* would close his eyes and turn himself into a blind mechanical vendor of prayer answers in a double-blind “scientific” prayer study.
- God* could be studied as a part of nature.
- God* would make all evil disappear without bothering each of us in our own little sets of desires and (shall we say) our little foibles and quirks.
- God* would allow earthquakes to form mountains and keep the earth fertile for food, but he would stop every tremor and every tsunami cold, right at each person’s doorstep.
- God* wouldn’t allow religions to disagree.
If God* were real he would do all these things.
But he doesn’t, so God* doesn’t exist. QED.
[Update after posting: see comment 11, and don’t everybody be so humorless, okay?]
The evidence is unassailable, the logic impeccable.
I find it intriguing how much energy atheists spend on disproving the existence of God*, whom no one has ever believed in. Millions upon millions have believed in God, and have presented multiple reasons to believe in him. But atheists keep disproving the existence of God*, a mythical being in whom no one has ever entertained an ounce of interest.
Haven’t they discovered yet what a boring game that is?
Wouldn’t it be a lot more exciting for them to find out who God is really supposed to be, and—if they must disprove something, and if they can, of course—disprove something that someone in the world is actually interested in?