rationalskepticism.org

The "debate" over that matter is just pure stubbornness. They create a god that has to be their perfect wish fulfillment fantasy - if it has any attributes that are lesser than they want it to have, then that's just unacceptable. Their god has to be all the things they want it to be! But then it's pointed out that if such a god existed, the world we live in would look very different to the one we live in. So rather than propose a god that is compatible with our world, they spend an extraordinary amount of effort to try to have their cake and eat it too. It's like if I were to decide I wanted to believe there's a being with a mortal aversion to the colour green, and the ability to change the colour of everything in the universe, purely by willing it. Someone then has the nerve to point out that there are a few too many green things in the universe, and asks why this green-hating entity hasn't changed everything green to a different colour. Rather than adjusting my view of what this entity must be like, I take this contradiction and call it "The Problem of Green", and act like it is this great theological mystery which only the most brilliant and learned of people could possibly "solve", rather than just being a product of my own stubbornness in wanting to believe in green eradicating entity while simultaneously living in a universe filled with green objects. Seriously people, just pick a more modest god already! Sure, such a god might be less appealing, but the universe doesn't revolve around satisfying your desires.