There are two senses of my use of the term assail:  censure and beset.  Censuring is formal disapproval that is usually written.  To beset is to trouble or persistently threaten.  An assailable god is hardly worthy of the title ‘god’.  In other words, a deity in need of defense cannot be considered a deity; yet all deities have that in common.  Every deity has been defended at some point or another.  Their actions are defended or even justified by their followers.  Their supposed existences are defended.  The scriptures they inspired and/or wrote are defended.  Thus, disapproval of x or y deity doesn’t confirm the existence of x or y deity as some believers would posit.  Rather, disapproval confirms weaknesses, flaws, and/or wrongs.

First, let us speak of a given god as an ideology.  Let us take Yahweh for example.  If Yahweh as an ideology demonstrates weakness, that weakness proves his nonexistence, especially when considering that he is said to be a perfect series of concepts.  Ideologies that leave room for alternatives are weak and therefore, assailable.  Think of political and economic ideologies.  Republicans constantly defend their views whilst Democrats do the same.  Both stances are assailable; thus, proving the weakness of their respective ideologies.  A Marxist and a Capitalist also fit the bill.  Both economic types are assailable; thus, revealing a weakness.  However, weakness doesn’t imply inefficacy.  It is possible to prove the efficacy of one political ideology over another.  It is also possible to prove that one economic type is more effective than another.  Moreover, it is possible to prove that they are effective dependent of circumstances.  The key difference between these ideologies and abstractions of gods is that most gods are allegedly perfect ideologies.  Therefore, if a deity is said to be a perfect set of concepts whilst demonstrating assailability, the deity does not exist.

Now let us speak of a god as if he actually exists.  There is a deity who purported to be above humans in terms of justice.  Thus, if I can prove that this deity’s justice is flawed, I have proven that he is wrong and I have effectively proven his nonexistence.  Is it just to convict an innocent man of a guilty man’s crime?  No.  Nonetheless, Yahweh felt it necessary to allow the crucifixion of his son as ransom for the guilty.  Is it just to murder the inhabitants of a residence due to an issue one has with a tenant residing at the residence?  Of course not.  Nevertheless, Yahweh thought it just to wipe out the inhabitants of the Earth even though his issue was with one inhabitant, namely man.  I can continue to point out flaws in his view of justice and continue to prove him wrong.  Furthermore, I can provide other examples of his character flaws; I can also provide other instances in which he was wrong.  Again, he is assailable.  Atheists beset Yahweh on all sides; the mere thought of him is severely censured by many of us.  The certainty of his existence in the minds of believers is persistently threatened by us; it is constantly put in doubt — their avoidance of this fact notwithstanding.  Them that believe in him are constantly forced to defend his existence and/or attempt to justify what many consider to be unjustifiable actions.  Therefore, if a deity is said to have a perfect character whilst having flaws, it logically follows that said deity doesn’t have a perfect character and thus, does not exist; if a deity is said to be perfectly right whist demonstrating the ability to be wrong, it logically follows that said deity is not perfectly right and does not exist.

Why is assailability important when regarding deities?  Why is perfection necessary?  Assailability is important because a deity worthy of recognition, devotion, worship, etc. must be perfect.  Perfection is necessary because an imperfect deity is equivalent to a human.  It is also important because the attribute of perfection is stressed in most religions.  Therefore, a deity in need of defense is an imperfect deity because the ideals, tenets, principles, ethics, creeds, and/or guidelines allegedly put forth by said deity have demonstrated assailable characteristics or because the deity itself has demonstrated assailable attributes.  Unfortunately, all deities have demonstrated an assailable nature.  That leads to a question:  what reason do we have to worship them?  Would it be logical to worship one another?  Perhaps not.  Thus, if the deities have manifested no qualities superior to our own, why acknowledge the faint possibility that any of them exist?