To create is to make something out of literally nothing. It means not that nothing is a material from which things are made. It means that what does not exist comes into being - it now exists. The Church says it means that God made all things from nothing and not from his own power or energy or himself. It says his power is as unchangeable as himself for it is him. It says that if God made things out of his power he would be making it of himself and that would be mutation not creation (Question 650, Radio Replies, Vol 1; Summa, Book One, chapter 17).
All the Church is able to say in refutation of the fact that if God is an infinite creator then he must be the creation is that experience proves we are not God who is a being without composition or parts which is what they mean when they say that the solution is in the fact that our being, our existence is different from God’s (page 145-6, Aquinas). But if this God exists our experience is misleading us.

God is his attributes so if he is a logically necessary being then everything he does is necessary and as necessary as he does for he is what he does. It follows that even the most useless grain of sand on a far distant planet is logically necessary for it was logically necessary for him to make it. But this is ridiculous. Even if God could be logically necessary this observation would cancel out this argument and show that there was some big misunderstanding in our reasoning that led us to think God necessarily exists.
If you want to make God an explanation for creation then you have to show that the idea of God makes sense but you cannot prove that and indeed there is proof that it does not make sense. Also, nobody denies that if there is a God he is a mystery and the way he does things is a mystery. This means you cannot be sure if you are talking nonsense or not when you talk about your faith in God. Many religions have got people to accept nonsense as true by telling them it is a mystery.


Religion says a miracle is far-fetched but we can still believe if the evidence is still good enough. 

Believers say even a grain of sand is a miracle. But it is a material thing. What if you were to say that a being without parts would be a bigger miracle?That would require massive evidence.  And evidence for nonsense is not evidence at all.  No evidence is ever good enough to justify belief in nonsense.  A God who does miracles would have to be the biggest miracle of all.  An unlimited God is an unlimited miracle.  Thus it is unreasonable to believe in God and unreasonable to suppose that the idea of spirit even makes sense.  Evidence for something that you are only guessing makes sense is as bad as evidence for outright nonsense.  No evidence "for" outright nonsense would be better for it is more easily demolished.


All, believers and atheists, seem to agree that there is noting necessarily contradictory in saying there is no God.  If that is true then it is possible that God is contradictory though we do not know how for the doctrine is loaded with mystery.  Reason says then that to adopt belief in God is irrational for it is taking a risk with coherence.


Idealism is the doctrine that spirit is real but it does not stop there.  It says that all things despite how it looks are spirit.

Bertrand Russell thought that whether true or false idealism is not absurd. But it is absurd for you cannot just say that non-material powers and beings and spirits may exist for by definition you can only assume that. You cannot just assume a dragon lives in the volcano. That would be mad but assuming the possibility of spirit is worse. Thoughts might seem like non-material things but we see something non-material and magical in beautiful places on beautiful days. If thoughts can be non-material that does not mean living beings such as God or souls can exist. Trees being alive does not mean stones have to be alive.

The point is that if we cannot show idealism is false then the reason is that we are assuming spirit makes sense in the first place.  We assume it may simulate material things and forces.

We should not be assuming spirit or idealism in the first place. Problem solved!

The fact that there is a problem shows that we should not be assuming spirit is possible.  There is and can be no evidence so it is just like, "I am so infallible that I can decide that spirit exists just because I want to believe in it and my want to believe in it makes it sensible to believe in it."

Assuming leads to circles and incoherence.

There is no God. The belief is incoherent. It is therefore opposed to correct thinking which means it is opposed to people for we need to think correctly for our own self-confidence and our welfare.  That is our answer to fools who say, "Being anti-God makes as much sense as being anti-square circle."  God is not treated as a square circle though he is and that is where the problem is.  What about the notion that God may make no sense to us but still make sense?  There is no such thing as taking a risk with a view.  You cannot say it is okay to take a risk.  It is incoherent to say what may be incoherent is true or coherent.  It is a lie. 

A HISTORY OF GOD, Karen Armstrong, Mandarin, London, 1994
A HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY, VOL 6, PART II, KANT, Frederick Copleston SJ, Doubleday/Image, New York, 1964
A PATH FROM ROME, Anthony Kenny Sidgwick & Jackson, London, 1985
A SHATTERED VISAGE THE REAL FACE OF ATHEISM, Ravi Zacharias, Wolgemuth & Hyatt, Tennessee, 1990
A SUMMARY OF CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE, Louis Berkhof, The Banner of Truth Trust, London, 1971
AN INTELLIGENT PERSONS GUIDE TO CATHOLICISM, Alban McCoy, Continuum, London and New York, 1997
APOLOGETICS AND CATHOLIC DOCTRINE, Part 1, Most Rev M Sheehan DD, MH Gill, & Son, Dublin, 1954
APOLOGETICS FOR THE PULPIT, Aloysius Roche, Burns Oates & Washbourne LTD, London, 1950
AQUINAS, FC Copleston, Penguin Books, London, 1991
ARGUING WITH GOD, Hugh Sylvester, IVP, London, 1971
ASKING THEM QUESTIONS, Various, Oxford University Press, London, 1936
BELIEVING IN GOD, PJ McGrath, Wolfhound Press, Dublin, 1995
BEYOND GOOD AND EVIL, Friedrich Nietzsche, Penguin, London, 1990
CITY OF GOD, St Augustine, Penguin Books, Middlesex, 1986
CONTROVERSY: THE HUMANIST CHRISTIAN ENCOUNTER, Hector Hawton, Pemberton Books, London, 1971
CRITIQUES OF GOD, Edited by Peter A Angeles, Prometheus Books, New York, 1995
DIALOGUES CONCERNING NATURAL RELIGION, David Hume, William Blackwood and Sons, Edinburgh and London, 1907
DOES GOD EXIST? Brian Davies OP, Catholic Truth Society, London, 1982
DOES GOD EXIST? Herbert W Armstrong, Worldwide Church of God, Pasadena, California, 1972
DOING AWAY WITH GOD? Russell Stannard, Marshall Pickering, London, 1993
EVIL AND THE GOD OF LOVE, John Hicks, Fontana, 1977
GOD A GUIDE FOR THE PERPLEXED Keith Ward, OneWorld, Oxford, 2003
GOD AND EVIL, Brian Davies OP, Catholic Truth Society, London, 1984
GOD AND PHILOSOPHY, Antony Flew, Hutchinson, London, 1966
GOD AND THE HUMAN CONDITION, F J Sheed, Sheed & Ward, London 1967
GOD AND THE NEW PHYSICS, Paul Davies, Penguin Books, London, 1990
GOD AND THE PROBLEM OF SUFFERING, Philip St Romain, Liguori Publications, Illinois, 1986
GOD THE PROBLEM, Gordon D Kaufman, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 1973
HANDBOOK OF CHRISTIAN APOLOGETICS, Peter Kreeft and Ronald Tacelli, Monarch, East Sussex, 1995
HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY, VOL 2, Frederick Copleston SJ Westminster, Maryland, Newman, 1962
HONEST TO GOD, John AT Robinson, SCM Press, London, 1963
HUMAN NATURE DID GOD CREATE IT? Herbert W Armstrong, Worldwide Church of God, Pasadena, California, 1976
IN DEFENCE OF THE FAITH, Dave Hunt, Harvest House, Eugene Oregon, 1996
IN SEARCH OF CERTAINTY, John Guest Regal Books, Ventura, California, 1983
JESUS HYPOTHESES, V. Messori, St Paul Publications, Slough, 1977
NEW CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA, The Catholic University of America and the McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., Washington, District of Columbia, 1967
ON THE TRUTH OF THE CATHOLIC FAITH, BOOK ONE, GOD, St Thomas Aquinas, Image Doubleday and Co, New York, 1961
OXFORD DICTIONARY OF PHILOSOPHY, Simon Blackburn, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1996
Philosophy of Religion for A Level, Anne Jordan, Neil Lockyer and Edwin Tate, Nelson Throne Ltd, Cheltenham, 2004
RADIO REPLIES, Vol 1, Frs Rumble and Carty, Radio Replies Press, St Paul, Minnesota, 1938
RADIO REPLIES, Vol 2, Frs Rumble and Carty, Radio Replies Press, St Paul, Minnesota, 1940
RADIO REPLIES, Vol 3, Frs Rumble and Carty, Radio Replies Press, St Paul, Minnesota, 1942
REASON AND RELIGION, Anthony Kenny, Basil Blackwell Ltd, Oxford, 1987
SALVIFICI DOLORIS, Pope John Paul II, Catholic Truth Society, London, 1984
SEX AND MARRIAGE – A CATHOLIC PERSPECTIVE, John M Hamrogue CSSR, Liguori, Illinois, 1987
TAKING LEAVE OF GOD, Don Cupitt, SCM Press, London, 1980
THE CASE AGAINST GOD, Gerald Priestland, Collins, Fount Paperbacks, London, 1984
THE CONCEPT OF GOD, Ronald H Nash, Zondervan, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1983
THE HONEST TO GOD DEBATE Edited by David L Edwards, Westminster Press, Philadelphia, 1963
THE KINDNESS OF GOD, EJ Cuskelly MSC, Mercier Press, Cork, 1965
THE PROBLEM OF PAIN, CS Lewis, Fontana, London, 1972
THE PROBLEM OF SUFFERING, Alan Hayward, Christadelphian ALS, Birmingham, undated
THE PUZZLE OF GOD, Peter Vardy, Collins, London, 1990
THE REALITY OF GOD AND THE PROBLEM OF EVIL, Brian Davies, Continuum, London-New York, 2006
THE RECONSTRUCTION OF BELIEF, Charles Gore DD, John Murray, London, 1930
THE TRUTH OF CHRISTIANITY, WH Turton, Wells Gardner, Darton & Co Ltd, London, 1905
UNBLIND FAITH, Michael J Langford, SCM, London, 1982
WHAT IS FAITH? Anthony Kenny, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1992
WHY DOES GOD ALLOW SUFFERING? LG Sargent, Christadelphian Publishing Office, Birmingham, undated
WHY DOES GOD ALLOW SUFFERING? Misc, Worldwide Church of God, Pasadena, California, 1985
WHY DOES GOD? Domenico Grasso, St Paul, Bucks, 1970
WHY WOULD A GOOD GOD ALLOW SUFFERING? Radio Bible Class, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1990

No Copyright