By Eddie Miles
We everyday skeptics often come to a point in a debate at which the question is posed, "If God really loves your uncle who was in a motorcycle accident and wants him to get better, why did he cause him to have the accident in the first place?"
Now, there are a few different answers that we get for this question but this post is just about one: "God is testing his faith."
At first, this seems like an intellectual dead end, that theistic claim that kills the debate because it becomes a matter of faith over evidence and is therefore unarguable. Fortunately, it's not. The debate can continue from this point and here's how.
Think about the implications of a test. In school, your teacher probably administered many tests. He or she did this to find out how much of the subject matter you actually absorbed. Of course, the best way to do this is to read your mind directly but since a school teacher doesn't have this power, he/she resorts to the next best method: testing. In other words, a test is a way for a being who IS NOT OMNISCIENT to know what's in your mind. A being who IS omniscient would have no use for such tools as said being could directly read your mind to know what you're thinking and what you know or believe.
What this tells us about the test of faith hypothesis is that either god isn't omniscient or things like motorcycle accidents aren't "tests of faith" because an omniscient god would have no need for tests and a being who has a need for tests obviously isn't all-knowing.
Posted from www.theeverydayskeptic.com
Oooooo, thank you so much for this!! The dumbass god-is-testing-your-faith response makes me want to slap the stupid out of some of these fundies. :D Thanks again!
Or if he's omniscient and he already knew the answer and still caused the motorcycle accident, he's just an @sshole. Either way, it's a no-go.