It is easier to show why a theory is wrong than to show why it is right.  A theory that explains how it might be shown wrong is a good one. 

In science, it is recognised that where possible the principle of falsification must be applied.  Nobody says it is perfect.  It does not help with the biggest law of all, gravity.  But it is helpful in separating science from nonsense pretending to be science.  It merely says a good credible theory is one that passes attempts to show it wrong.  You need to give your theory and lay out what would refute it.

The model of falsification can help in other disciplines as well.

Religion treats God, a being with different properties, as a unit to try and dodge the scalpel that is the Falsification Principle. This is because the unit does not look so ridiculous. Break it down and demand detail and its veneer crumbles.  You are being stopped from considering each one of the forces that make up God and their individual significance.  There is plenty to hide amid the word God.
What is the most important thing about God? What is the most important and basic thing he has? If we honour God and love him we will honour that the most.
Free will?
Power to create from nothing?
It would be power. There is no life without power. So life is next.
This is the correct order.
Knowledge - you need to know you are alive to have free will
Free will
Love - there is no love so we are told, unless free will is there
Power to create from nothing

So you get the order right.  Then you apply the principle to each one. 

Now take life.  Nothing tells us how you show a being that has no body is NOT alive.  Free will is controversial anyway.  There is in fact no reason to think it exists.  And if it did exist in us a God who is outside of time and space and who cannot change cannot have it in any recognisable sense.  But religion gives no test for showing God cannot have any free will.  It gives no test that his love is really love.  Love is not a lovely sweet thing when religion says, "If there is an eternal Hell, there is no justification for me choosing to sin and go there when I know it will stop anybody else going there."  Remember this is a hypothetical thing but it shows us the fatal contradiction.  Love and wellbeing are not as easily connected as you would be led to believe.

If something is made untestable then if you are going to say x you must admit you can say a or b or c ad infinitum.  So it is meaningless.  You intend to be meaningless when you say it.  Words that would normally mean something are meaningless for you take meaning from them.

Custard is custard whether it is a spoonful or a lake.  Meaningless is meaningless. Yet the more important the thing you make untestable, the more meaninglessness you state it with.

So to sum up God is a pile of untestable statements.  As religion says he should have complete and absolute importance to us that only adds insult to injury.


No Copyright