system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
I think belief in God is indefensible on any grounds CMV

**based on the response I got from Subtle150, I think I should probably preface this opinion with the absolutely sincere declaration that I am 100% open to any argument against what I say here, and I'm totally open to having my mind changed about this topic. I've put a lot of thought in to this, because it means a lot to me, and laid it all out here in the most detailed way I could, not to be pretentious, but to express everything I think about the topic. Feel free to pick apart anything you think is wrong with it, I am open to it**

Belief in God(s) is ~~fairly useless~~ incredibly illogical, and is not necessary to provide the benefits attributed to belief in it(them) (Thanks Failedhall for pointing out the original was kind of arrogant). It is absolutely impossible to prove or disprove the existence of God and none of the defenses people give for believing in God without evidence have any grounding.

No one has been able to, can now, or ever will be able to prove or disprove the existence of God. (However, neither can anyone prove or disprove the existence of Santa Clause, unicorns, leprechauns, the tooth fairy, Zeus, Thor, Huitzilopochtli, daemons, witches or anything else of the sort - common sense helps us to weigh in on the existence of those beings.)

But even if you gift to theists the claim that God(s) exists, I would argue they gain nothing of value anyway.

Let us say that it is absolutely, irrefutably, true that there is an omnipotent, omniscient, benevolent, creator of the universe (or multiple). You still can't move on from this claim to anything useful.

Merely conceding that God(s) exists only gives a proprietor and instigator to the Universe and Natural Laws. To do anything further, you would have to argue that human beings can interpret the will and function of God(s).

How could (decidedly) finite beings such as ourselves ever even hope to discern the will or means of an infinite being(s)?

Let us even say that God(s) exists and that it(they) is(are) the embodiment and command of everything that is good, just, and right in this Universe. You are **still** left with nothing. We still could not postulate as to what is good or bad. Slavery could be good, just and right. Murder could be good, just and right. With no means to interpret the will or means of God(s), you are left with nothing to ground claims of what is good, right, or just. You are left in the same position as a non-believer in regards to morality.

Even if *the Universe has a creator(s) - a being(s) that set it in motion - *even if the natural laws have a proprietor(s), what are we left with? We are in the same position as we would be in without belief in things unfounded. We would still have to study the Natural Laws, investigate the workings of the Universe, ponder on the Just and Moral, with nothing gained from belief.

So belief in God as a basis for morality has no grounding.

And this is not even to touch on the problems that arise when we do concede we can interpret the will an means of God. The justification for those beliefs refutes itself, and merely by the existence of bad things that could stem from them (persecution of other religious groups you disagree with based on divine providence, illogical and unhealthy actions (genital mutilation, drinking the kool-aide, etc.), things that would not exists without them, and deserve to be tossed away.

Believing in God as a comfort from the fear of death is without grounding as well. Even if I grant you that God exists, it still does not prove that there is an afterlife. So, you could still just die and there would be nothing left you *anyway*, even with the existence of God.

Belief in the supernatural is vacuous, leaving the believer with definitely no more (but arguably less) than they began with.
gpt
Belief in god is non-logical. Not necessarily illogical, but non-logical. It doesn't take logic into account. That's what faith means. Non-logical thinking isn't always necessarily worse than logical thinking. For example, optimism and high self-esteem correlate with success regardless of the validity of those views. 

Yes, terrible things are done in God's name, but so are great things. This implies that its not religion that causes these things, but rather terrible or great people using religion as an excuse or inspiration. Meanwhile, religion is helping many people cope with things like tragedy and death anxiety and depression on a personal level. 

So, its defensible in that its useful, not in that it makes sense.