The main reason I'm an atheist

[The Atheist]

The sizes and scope of the universe is fatal to the logic of efficiency of a claimed all powerful god. It makes absolutely NO sense at all to stick your favorite product on a speck of dust out in this gigantic sea of hostility where life cannot exist in the majority of the universe, and on top of that, make it impossible to migrate off this rock while insisting we follow this claimed being who gave us all these various books and religions that we end up needlessly murdering each other over. Not only is this alleged "plan" flawed on efficiency alone, there is also no logical way to claim this god is moral in the slightest. At best, if we are to assume for argument's sake only, that such a being existed, we could only be property, toys, lab rats.

I never found the whole "we're too tiny for God to care" argument valuable.

When we see a bridge or a road or a building, we assume it was built to be used; building something requires time, energy, resources, etc. But it's a mistake on the atheist's part to ascribe this limitation to a theistic god, because a theistic god is one possessing the three omni- attributes of omniscience, omnipotence, and omnipresence. Taken to its logical end, a truly theistic god would be totally aware of every particle of matter at every moment in time, much in the way the "theistic" computer of a virtual reality world might be. In addition to omniscience, the attribute of omnipotence implies that the god can be omniscient without any cost to itself; unlike the bridge builder, the god would expend nothing of itself to know everything, nor would it to have created a universe. And what is omnipresence but the logical consequence of omnipotence and omniscience?

Of course, a valid question is why create a massive and uninhabitable universe for the sake of one tiny planet of people? Many religions have different answers, but the Christian answer is two-fold. First, the Christian would say that if the universe had been created any other way, it would be more obvious that a god existed, which would be problematic for Christianity because one of the central teachings of the religion is that God wants people to live by faith, not evidence. Second, the Christian might argue that God would have created, but in the form of cosmic evolution. Going back to my virtual world analogy, evolutionary biologists will sometimes use computer models to study evolution. If there existed a virtual world in which evolution occured, the evolution would appear to be an independent process not requiring the oversight of any computer; the computer would be effortlessly woven into the fabric of the reality itself to the point of being undetectable by the biased inhabitant of the virtual world. Similarly, according to the Christian, the "hand of God" is uniform over cosmic and biological evolution. There is not a "god of the gaps," as Richard Dawkins would say, but simply a theistic god in the truest sense.