This discussion is about two things. First, the compatibility of God (understood as an omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent being) and antinatalism (understood to be the thesis that it is immoral to procreate, other things being equal). Second, to what extent the existence of God implies the truth of antinatalism.

The compatibility question first: is God's existence compatible with antinatalism? Yes, I think so. If antinatalism is true, then God - being morally perfect - would not have created us (or so we would have good reason to believe). But this is entirely consistent with being omnipotent and omniscient.

Being all powerful does not essentially involve having created everything. Being all powerful involves being able to do anything. But being able to do anything is not the same as having created everything (or, indeed, anything). God could make it the case that he created everything - he's all powerful, so that's within his power. But once again, having the power to make it the case that one created everything is not equivalent actually to having created everything.

There is, of course, a 'case' for thinking that God created everything. But the case is not very powerful. There is a very good case - I would say decisive - for thinking that everything that has come into being has a cause of its doing so. And that therefore there must be some thing or things that exist without having been brought into being. But to suppose that there is precisely 'one' such thing, has very little to be said for it.

Some people may, of course, be committed to the idea that God created us because they believe in the truth of this or that religion and this or that religion asserts that God created us. But that's not evidence, it's just dogma.

So, as far as I can see then, God's existence is compatible with antinatalism. But does God's existence positively imply antinatalism? I think so.

First, if God exists, then our lives here serve some purpose. Why? Because our lives here are fraught with danger and we are very ignorant. It stands to reason that an omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent being would not have permitted such lives to exist unless doing so served some purpose. Thus, if God exists, our lives have a purpose.

But it also stands to reason that God would not have allowed innocent creatures to live in ignorance in a dangerous world. Thus, as God exists and there is no doubt we do live in ignorance in a dangerous world, we can conclude that we are not innocent.

So we now know that if God exists, then a) our lives here have a purpose and b) that we are not innocent. And we can go further, for from this it seems clear what purpose our lives here serve: protection, punishment and rehabilitation. Those seem to be the only reasons why God would suffer us to exist here. That is, to protect the innocent from us without destroying us; to give us our just deserts; and to give us an opportunity to change our ways. No other purpose seems plausible.

Why does this imply antinatalism? Well, if you are in prison, is it morally okay to make innocent people join you? No, obviously not. Someone who attempted to do that, would do no more than make themselves deserving of another lifetime in the prison. So knowingly to attempt to bring what you take to be innocent people into a world such as this one - a world we can know that God would not have suffered innocent people to live in - would be a wicked crime.

I think then that God's existence is entirely compatible with antinatalism and furthermore careful reflection on what the purpose of our lives may be, shows that God's existence positively implies the truth of antinatalism. This world is a prison, and if you try and procreate you are actively trying to bring an innocent person into the prison to join you - which is wicked.