Kfroog

I'll admit I'm not a very smart person; lacking, as I do, any formal training in logic, I've been unable to evaluate the arguments that I'll be putting forth here. For this reason, I ask everyone here to help me punch whatever holes there are to be punched in this.

Leaving aside the possibility of the cloudy, unknowable, unfalsifiable god espoused by theologians, I can disprove the existence of the anthropomorphic god worshipped by the lay religious in two ways: The fundamental mortality of humans, and the uniqueness of humans to the planet Earth.

Humans, being living things, are complexes of defensive measures to ward off death. Our hearts pump blood to the cells throughout our bodies, supplying them with precious energy. Our stomachs and intestines absorb nutrients out of which to build replacements for dead cells. Our lungs take in O₂ and expel poisonous CO₂. Our colons and rectums are so patently ungodly they needn't even be discussed. All of these parts, plainly not tacked onto our design haphazardly, are expressly for the purpose of delaying the inevitable entropy of death. A god, being immortal, would have no need of defence against death, and thus the great bulk of human anatomy would be entirely vestigial for one.

Furthermore, for a god to be human, humans would have had to arise somewhere else in the universe. But in the reconstructed history of how humans came to be, we see a string of events which depend entirely upon the particular geography of this planet.

All of this, of course, relies on the premise that a being with a human face, arms and legs must be a human, and I'm not certain that the lay public will agree with me on that point.

Yosei

I always disliked the anthropomorphic projections Christianity has placed on the Divinity. I don't think that is the right way.