why god is logically impossible

From the Kreuger vs. McHugh debate at infidels.org

“A being with unusual powers or characteristics may exist, but a being with contradictory features cannot exist. When I say that a being’s attributes are “incoherent,” I mean much more than that the attributes of that being are strange or mysterious. I mean that they contradict. This means that if one or more of the attributes are true of that being, then it is also true that one or more of the other attributes of that being must, by definition, be false, and such a being–one with contradictory attributes–is not a possible being. And thus such a being could not exist. [See chapter 12 of Michael Martin’s Atheism: A Philosophical Justification (Philadelphia: Temple Univ. Press, 1990) and Ted Drange’s online article (originally published in Philo, 1998 (2), pp. 49-60), “The Incompatible Properties Argument: A Survey.”

Contradictory properties Argument.
1. Any being with contradictory properties cannot exist.
2. God is a being with contradictory properties.
3. Therefore, god cannot exist.

I will discuss here only the contradictory attributes traditionally ascribed to god in the Judeo-xian-Islamic tradition. However, this traditional xian concept of god is not coherent.

Let’s begin with some contradictory attributes due to the omniscience of god. It is not exactly clear what is meant when one says of god that he is omniscient, or all-knowing. But surely one at least means by this that god is not ignorant of something known to some other person. So to say of god that he is all-knowing seems to clearly imply that for any knowledge K known to someone S, god also knows K. If someone S has some knowledge K that god does not or cannot have, then god would be both ignorant of K and by definition omniscient or all-knowing, which is incoherent.

When we speak of knowing, we may for the present purposes divide knowledge into several categories:
1) Factual or propositional knowledge, which is to say that it is expressible as a true sentence or true belief.
2) Procedural knowledge, which is the kind of knowledge of how to perform some complex skill, such as the skill used when one plays tennis or juggles. This kind of knowledge is different from propositional knowledge. Anyone who has tried to learn juggling, bicycling (or unicycling), bowling, etc. is aware that even though the novice can correctly repeat factual knowledge about a skill as well as a master of the skill, a different kind of knowledge is required to perform well at the task in question.
3) Knowledge by direct acquaintance, which is an immediate awareness (the direct acquaintance) of an occurring event or a direct memory of an event derived by direct acquaintance. This knowledge by personal experience is something we rely on and refer to constantly in daily life.

However, god cannot have all these categories of knowledge about all things that can be known. Here are some contradictory attributes of the theistic god concept.

Omniscience v. Omnibenevolence: Knowing pleasure in killing.
A human terrorist: Can know by direct acquaintance the experience of satisfaction derived from unjustly killing large numbers of civilian human beings.
God: Can’t know this experience by direct acquaintance, since god omnibenevolent.

In this case, a human being can know something that god can’t know. But god is supposed to be omniscient, so god must know it. But god can’t know it.

God may be able to delineate or explain the factual knowledge, or even the procedural knowledge, about unjustly killing large numbers of civilian human beings, but surely an omnibenevolent being cannot know by personal experience, by direct acquaintance, the pleasure or satisfaction felt by a terrorist at the killing of large numbers of civilian human beings. There are many other examples of cruelty or torture that could also be used in the same way. God is omnibenevolent, or morally perfect, and this precludes god enjoying unjust torture or suffering. (Examples in the bible in which god performs such actions will be ignored.) The most important part of knowing the enjoyment of killing large numbers of civilian human beings is the experience of the enjoyment that comes from such unjust suffering. God is by definition a being who does not enjoy such things. God cannot have such an experience. So god cannot know by direct acquaintance, by personal experience, something that can be known by a terrorist. So the concept is incoherent.

Omniscience v. omniscience: Make a mistake
Human: Can know the experience of finding out he or she made a mistake.
God: Cannot know this, since god supposedly is omniscient, so god can’t make mistakes and thus can’t know the experience of finding out that he’s made a mistake.

Omniscience v. Omnibenevolence: Knowing pleasure in sex. Human: Can know what it’s like to experience the pleasure of sexual intercourse.
God: Can’t know this, since god is omnibenevolent, and according to the Judeo-xian-Islamic view of sex, god can’t “debase” himself to know such pleasure.

Omniscience v. Omnibenevolence: Knowing the intense desire for sexual pleasure.
Human: Can know what it’s like to experience the intense desire for the pleasure of sexual intercourse. God: Can’t know this, since god is omnibenevolent, and according to the xian view of sex, god can’t “debase” himself to know the desire for such pleasure.

Omniscience v. omnipotence: Learning how to do something.
Human being: Can know by personal experience what it is like to learn how to do something.
God: Already knows everything, so god can’t know what it is like to learn how to do something.

So in this case a human can perform the action of learning, which god cannot, so it would seem that a human can also perform actions that an omnipotent being cannot.

Omniscience v. omniscience: Be an Atheist
Human: Can know what it’s like to be an atheist.
God: Can’t know what it’s like to be an atheist.

So once again a human being can know something that it is possible to know, yet god can’t know it. But god is omniscient and is supposed to be all-knowing. So the concept is incoherent.

Here are a few examples involving other attributes of god.

Omnibenevolence v. Omnipotence: Engaging in sexual intercourse.
Human: There are billions of human beings. Obviously humans engage in sexual intercourse.
God: Because god is “too good” to engage in sexual intercourse, god cannot engage in sexual intercourse. God can’t do something that almost all humans can do.

Transcendence v. omniscience and omnipotence: Swimming.
Human swimmer: Know a skill such as swimming by procedural knowledge and direct acquaintance.
God: Can’t know swimming in this way because he is outside of space and time, so he has no body with which to swim. This applies to many physical skills, so there are many more examples of contradictory attributes of god.

Omnipotence v. omnibenevolence: Sin
Human: I can sin.
God: God can’t sin, since he is omnibenevolent.

So there is something that is allegedly easily done, sinning, yet god, an omnipotent being, can’t do it. That is incoherent.

Transcendence v. Omnipresence:
God is transcendent (outside space and time).
God is omnipresent, i.e., existing everywhere in space.
So god is not in space and time and god is everywhere in space and time.

That is clearly incoherent.

Transcendence v. Omnipotence:
God is transcendent (i.e., outside of space and time).
All movement, by definition, is within space and time.
Therefore, god cannot move.
If god cannot move, then god cannot perform any physical actions.
If god cannot perform any physical actions, then god has limited power.
God is all-powerful.
If god is all-powerful, then god does not have limited power.
Therefore, god has limited power and does not have limited power.

That is incoherent.

There are many more contradictions, but this should suffice for now. The concept of god has many incoherent properties, so we are justified in believing that such a being cannot exist. If we were to add other alleged properties of god, such as infinitely merciful, perfectly just, the trinity, etc. one could generate many other contradictions.”