One Christian of which I am aware has been kind enough to attempt a response to My Case Against God. Arthenor begins to examine Part 1 of that series in a post on his blog called Rationality of Theism. For what it’s worth (and with the hope that it might benefit someone), here are a few of my comments. Block quotes are taken from Arthenor’s post.

“The exact mechanics of ‘being everywhere’ are not explicitly discussed in scripture to my knowledge.”

Jeremiah 23:24 is pretty clear – gOd FILLS heaven and earth. He isn’t merely aware of everything. Psalm 139:7-8 seems to reinforce the point.

http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/knows.html

“Another approach to the problem of evil is to note that God allows evil as a product, not of His own will, but of our own freewill. Thus, God, not being the author of evil, can be all-good, and allow evil.”

Mere buck passing. If a human knew about the 9/11 attacks and could have prevented them but did not, it would be obscene to call that human “all-good.” It is much worse to apply the term to the entity that not only knows everything and has the power to change everything but set up the rules that included the possibility of death, pain, and evil in the first place. If those things are actually “good” and we humans are too stupid to recognize them as such, we’re too stupid to know much of anything at all.

As for the common Christian tactic of invoking our alleged free will to get gOd off the hook… it just doesn’t make sense to me. Either there are reasons for our behavior or there isn’t. If there are reasons (causes), those reasons (causes) are responsible for it. If our behavior doesn’t have a reason, it’s chaotic and arbitrary – which would seem to pretty much pre-empt all attempts to assign responsibility….

Christians seem to think people choose to be evil. But why would they? Out of selfishness? Pride? Well, did they choose to be selfish and prideful? Why? Because it feels good? Well, did they choose for it to feel good? Did they choose to be weak when it comes to temptation? Christians try to arbitrarily cut off the cause-and-effect chain at the individual – but the only individual that works for is the gOd they strive so hard to protect! Alas for them, if their gOd exists, all causal chains lead to him – which absolves everyone and everything else of ultimate responsibility.

“He can be all-powerful and will triumph over evil at some point in time, but must not necessarily do so from the beginning.”

Justice delayed is justice denied.

Just because you promise to someday pay off all your debts doesn’t mean you aren’t a debtor today.

“God can be all-knowing, and have chosen to allow a period of evil to ultimately produce a world of even greater good than would have otherwise been possible.”

The old “necessary evil” argument. But saying that evil is necessary in order for a greater good to be achieved amounts to a denial of gOd’s omnipotence. What kind of gOd MUST have allowed the Holocaust? Certainly not an all-good one.

And if I’m wrong, hey – doesn’t that mean we should CELEBRATE the Holocaust? Maybe even orchestrate another?

Once again, Christians seem willing to destroy the obvious difference between good and evil in order to save their precious gOd. Just one of the ways theism and Christianity are the enemies of morality even as theists and Christians self-righteously pose as its defender.

“Certainly not an all-good one” ought to read “Certainly not an all-powerful one”….

The same criticism applies to those assertions regarding gOd’s power vs. logic. If gOd is subject to the laws of logic, he isn’t omnipotent – the laws of logic are superior. (And where might they have come from if not gOd?) If gOd isn’t subject to the laws of logic as we know them, then he is, by definition, absurd and incomprehensible. Talking about him is a waste of time.

It all reminds me of something George H. Smith said about how theists answer a mystery with a greater mystery and for some reason think that’s progress.