What is your best argument for/against the existence of God?

Author: Best.Korea

Posts

Total: 65
Topic's author
#1
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,638
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
I dont mean to start any debate here.

I am just curious as to what convinced you that God exists or if you are atheist, that he doesnt exist.

I know for atheists, there is problem of evil, and the problem of who created God.

While for religious, there is uncaused cause and the need for the creator of laws of the universe.

So, other than these, what exactly convinced you that there is God? Or if atheist, what convinced you that there is no God?
#2
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,597
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
-->
@Best.Korea

Child mortality rates were very high throughout most of human history.
As recently as two centuries ago, around 1 in 2 children died before reaching the end of puberty. Researchers made this observation across many societies. Our ancestors were largely powerless against poverty, famine, and disease, and these calamities were especially devastating for children.

Doesn't poor design show that there is no God?
#3
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,260
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@Best.Korea
I don't advocate for the position that God does not exist, but I do find the arguments for his nonexistence to be far stronger than any argument for God's existence.

In cases where God is clearly defined in a meaningful way, there are always contradictions that disqualify the proposition from logical consideration. But to argue his nonexistence in a more vague way is less clear cut.

In this case, the problem of who created God is for me the strongest against. My version of it is as follows;

In order for a creator to create something, it must be more complex than it's creation. Therefore God must be more complex than the cosmos.

Occam's razor dictates that the simplest explanation is most likely correct, or more specifically, the most reasonable to believe.

God therefore adds to the complexity, making him less reasonable to believe than the alternative that he exists as the creator of the cosmos.
#4
n8nrgim
n8nrgim's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,023
3
2
5
n8nrgim's avatar
n8nrgim
3
2
5
things that look like supernatural healings occur to christians, and we can't say for sure similar things happen to atheists, or much at all to other religions. 

the large majority of NDE experiencers come back believing in God if they were atheist to begin with. it's almost never that theists become atheists, and atheists dont usually just see what they'd expect for death or afterlife. 

i realize there are ways to poke holes on these, but common sense is that these are scientific evidences of God. 

then causality and design. 'every effect has a cause, the universe looks like an effect, and there might be an uncaused cause'. this is more 'consistent with God' than evidence, but these are decent philoophical arguments too. 

i use to say atheism is irrational, but now i say it's plausibly rational but lacking in common sense. 

i still say it's irrational to argue there's no evidence for the afterlife, though. 
#5
IlDiavolo
IlDiavolo's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,512
3
2
5
IlDiavolo's avatar
IlDiavolo
3
2
5
-->
@Double_R
In this case, the problem of who created God is for me the strongest against. My version of it is as follows;
This argument is no longer a problem. If you consider the ultimate creator ("God" in this case) as eternal, meaning not affected by the time, you don’t need to go any further. And that is possible because time is just a variable according to physic laws, which means time is just a creation of the ultimate creator.

All the same, this doesn’t necessarily demostrate the existence of God, specially if we consider the "God" of religions which to me it doesn't exist. To me it's possible the existence of an utimate creator which has to be conscious, but this doesn’t mean a religious "God". 
#6
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,067
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Best.Korea
Interesting.

As it is only "convincing" that causes us to accept and then transfer GOD data.


The onus falls upon theists to prove that a GOD exists.

Because I  don't need to bother to prove that it doesn't.

Because theists cannot prove that a GOD exists.



That is:

A God, as in a magical floaty about bloke.


Though, GOD principle remains sound... But unexplained.
#7
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,260
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@IlDiavolo
This argument is no longer a problem. If you consider the ultimate creator ("God" in this case) as eternal, meaning not affected by the time, you don’t need to go any further. And that is possible because time is just a variable according to physic laws, which means time is just a creation of the ultimate creator.
This is an incoherent concept. A timeless existence would by definition be completely static, which is to say change is definitionally excluded. Creation by definition requires a state where something goes from not existing in it's described form to existing in it's described form. That's a change, which contradicts the notion of a timeless existence.
#8
n8nrgim
n8nrgim's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,023
3
2
5
n8nrgim's avatar
n8nrgim
3
2
5
-->
@IlDiavolo
@Double_R
Double has a frequent tendency of arguing that he is right, by definition, on issues that r at best debatable. 
#9
IlDiavolo
IlDiavolo's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,512
3
2
5
IlDiavolo's avatar
IlDiavolo
3
2
5
-->
@Double_R
This is an incoherent concept. A timeless existence would by definition be completely static, which is to say change is definitionally excluded. Creation by definition requires a state where something goes from not existing in it's described form to existing in it's described form. That's a change, which contradicts the notion of a timeless existence.
I didn't mention anything about "timeless". Eternal doesn't necesarily mean "timeless", I said it's not affected by time, meaning that time is part of its existence, or if you will, this ultimate creator is part of the QUANTUM REALITY. You should know that according to quantum mechanics, time is just a variable, and the linear progression of time is just a perception, an illusion, so it's possible to change it.

Besides, either you're atheist or theist, in order to solve the puzzle of the universe existence, there is no better solution than the eternal existence, which means the universe or the material it is composed of should have always existed. Or do you really think the universe came up out of nothing? Lol.
#10
Swagnarok
Swagnarok's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 1,250
3
2
6
Swagnarok's avatar
Swagnarok
3
2
6
[1]. The human heart will beat more than 2.5 billion times during the average person's lifespan. If it has a mechanical failure at any point, you will die, yet the average age of first heart attack is 65 for males and 72 for females.


There is no repairman who sticks his hand inside your ribcage and does maintenance on it. For most people it has no mid-lifecycle cleaning or part replacement. Even so, the longest lived person was 122 years old at time of death. In contrast, this 2016 article was like "Wow, so impressive!" because a person had recently survived a total of 555 days (about 1.5 years) with an artificial heart using the latest technology.


In this day and age, our best technology cannot match the performance of the average human heart. This will change eventually, but just consider how many decades of R&D have gone into getting the artificial heart up to where it is today, and how much more will be required to get it up to that level. The human heart, in contrast, was allegedly not designed by anyone.

[2]. Various cited evidences for a "fine-tuned universe", such as life being impossible or nearly impossible if certain scientific equations had different values than they do in reality.

[3]. The hard problem of consciousness still has no answer in 2023. The brain's parts together have an undeniable synergistic effect that can't be explained; neurologists know enough to explain the machinery that enables a "philosophical zombie", but not how said machinery amounts to something which is greater than a philosophical zombie.
#11
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,436
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Best.Korea
I dont mean to start any debate here. 

I am just curious as to what convinced you that God exists or if you are atheist, that he doesnt exist.

I know for atheists, there is problem of evil, and the problem of who created God.

While for religious, there is uncaused cause and the need for the creator of laws of the universe.

So, other than these, what exactly convinced you that there is God? Or if atheist, what convinced you that there is no God?
Read the book of Esther.  Tell me how many times God is mentioned overtly or in passing.  And yet, the book itself is evidence of God doing what God does. His fingerprints are everywhere. Or are they? 

As you read this book, tell us, coincidence or providence? 


Topic's author
#12
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,638
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@Tradesecret
I would appreciate the evidence.
#13
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 390
1
2
7
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas
1
2
7
-->
@Best.Korea



Best.Korea,  AND THE MEMBERSHIP,

It is about time that you mention the BIBLICAL FACT, like I have done over the years,  that Miss Tradesecret in being a biblically 2nd class female (https://www.imagebam.com/view/MEGZNA4),  is going directly against Jesus' true words within the scriptures in trying to usurp the authority over the superior man in any type of discussion within this Religion Forum, but she is to just STFU!!!:   "Let a woman learn quietly with all submissiveness. I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain silent." (1 Timothy 2:11)

Furthermore, allegedly Miss Tradesecret  horrifically has a congregation at a  Calvinist hell bound church where she is an ungodly "Presbyterian Pastor" where she allegedly preaches to approximately 300 Kool Aid Drinkers of this faith!  With this FACT alone, she once again goes directly against Jesus' true words within the scriptures herewith:  "The women should keep silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says. If there is anything they desire to learn, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church." (1 Corinthians 14:34-35)

To the membership, now do you see how Bible Stupid Miss Tradesecret truly is, where she continues to avoid these Jesus inspired passages as shown above as if they didn't exist, therefore slapping Jesus in the face again, and again, and again, where at what point does she get the authority to not follow the above two disparaging passages about the biblical 2nd class women in the name of Jesus?

Drive these facts home in discussion with our #1 Bible Stupid Fool Miss Tradesecret to actually follow the Bible for a change, praise!

.
#14
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,260
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@n8nrgim
Double has a frequent tendency of arguing that he is right, by definition
That's because theists have a tendency to present arguments that are definitionally incoherent.
Topic's author
#15
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,638
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
This topic is just for presenting arguments for why you believe.

Now, attacking each other's arguments might be a bit off topic, and would eventually derail the point of the topic which is to say what convinced you and not to try to attack other's argument.
#16
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,260
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@IlDiavolo
I didn't mention anything about "timeless". Eternal doesn't necesarily mean "timeless", I said it's not affected by time, meaning that time is part of its existence
You referred to time as a "creation of the ultimate creator". For it to have a creator that means something had to come before it, which could not be the case if time itself did not already apply.

Besides, either you're atheist or theist, in order to solve the puzzle of the universe existence, there is no better solution than the eternal existence, which means the universe or the material it is composed of should have always existed. Or do you really think the universe came up out of nothing?
I think there is no solution to the puzzle, because no matter how you attempt to solve it it doesn't work.

It's the age old question I've addressed here before; why is there something rather than nothing? There are only two possible categories in which the answer can lie; either it's a something or it's a nothing.

A nothing being the answer is logically incoherent, anything that could possibly qualify is definitionally excluded from this category.

A something being the answer is also logically contradictory as it would require something to be responsible for its own existence.

Both answers fail and there's no third option. So the only honest answer remaining is "I don't know".
#17
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,260
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@Best.Korea
This topic is just for presenting arguments for why you believe.
A DART thread that stays on topic? You must be new here.
Topic's author
#18
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,638
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@Double_R
A DART thread that stays on topic? You must be new here.
Yeah, I just arrived.

#19
IlDiavolo
IlDiavolo's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,512
3
2
5
IlDiavolo's avatar
IlDiavolo
3
2
5
-->
@Double_R
You referred to time as a "creation of the ultimate creator". For it to have a creator that means something had to come before it, which could not be the case if time itself did not already apply.
As I said, time for us is just a perception, an illusion, so I should have said "the perception of time was created by this ultimate creator", but for practical purposes, let's say time doesn't exist according to quantum mechanics.

Both answers fail and there's no third option. So the only honest answer remaining is "I don't know".
Your argument comes with a trap. You argue that creation involves getting something from nothing, which is not true. Creation is basically transform something from one state to another. So, if you have something that is eternal and at the same time have the capacity to change by itself, you can create whatever you want while you don't break the Lavoisier law.

Of course, I can be wrong and there may be a third option that we don't know yet.
#20
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,436
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Best.Korea
I would appreciate the evidence.
Did you read the book of Esther?
#21
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,436
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Best.Korea
I would appreciate the evidence.
You wouldn't know the evidence if you fell over it. 
#22
Reece101
Reece101's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,973
3
2
2
Reece101's avatar
Reece101
3
2
2
God exists inside our imagination.
#23
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,067
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Tradesecret
Myths contain evidence of actuality and tales of mystery.

Though tripping over myths won't prove anything more than we already do and don't know.

But we can interpret to our hearts content.


Mystery GOD, disappeared.

When it returns, give me a shout.

Because currently my heart is content.
Topic's author
#24
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,638
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@Tradesecret
Did you read the book of Esther?
No, but I am pretty, sure you can quote the evidence from it.
#25
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,615
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Best.Korea

Tradesecret wrote @Best.Korea :  Did you read the book of Esther?
Best.Korea wrote: No, but I am pretty sure you can quote the evidence from it.

Of course he can. He has been "taught to memories the bible backwards and forwards from a very early age" and  "in ancient Greek and Hebrew", too.🤣

#26
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,615
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Best.Korea
Best.Korea wrote: I would appreciate the evidence.
Tradesecret wrote:  You wouldn't know the evidence if you fell over it. 

And the Reverend Tradesecret wouldn't know the bible if it smacked him between the eyebrows, BK.

Topic's author
#27
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 357
Posts: 10,638
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@Swagnarok
Thats a pretty fine argument. I might even use it if I ever debate in favor of God again.
#28
YouFound_Lxam
YouFound_Lxam's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 2,182
3
4
7
YouFound_Lxam's avatar
YouFound_Lxam
3
4
7
-->
@Best.Korea
I think that the ontological argument is the best one.

Logically the universe had to of had a beginning. 
Therefore, nothing had to come before something.

Logically something cannot come from nothing. 
Therefore, a powerful force must have created something out of nothing.

Logically this force would have to be greater than any force we see today, both physically, emotionally, and atomically.
Therefore, this force would have to have morals, and the ability to do everything humans do and more.
Therefore, this is a personal force.

So basically God. Now of course there is no perfect argument, but it's a pretty good one. 


#29
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 390
1
2
7
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas
1
2
7
-->
@Stephen
@Best.Korea


.
Listen, we Christians have to accept that having "faith" is not, I repeat, is not as convincing as having “absolute undisputed FACTS about our serial killer Jesus' existence.  We do not have an absolute that Jesus as God of the universe existed in an absolute manner, period!  Admit it, the existence of Jesus is spurious at best if one actually reads the non bible writings about our Savior subsequent to His supposed death, where His first mention in historical writings was 64 YEARS SUBSEQUENT TO JESUS' DEATH THREW HEARSAY accountings from Josephus Flavius.  From this point on, it gets more embarrassing when Jesus’ name is hardly mentioned at all in further bogus ancient writings.

Another very disturbing FACT is that our Christian HEBREW God Jesus physically talked to his creation at all times within His JUDEO-Christian Bible. “Jesus said this, Jesus said that, Jesus intervened with His Hebrew creation all the time, Jesus as God walked in the Garden of Eden, Jesus spoke to every important bible character who has a chapter within the Bible!  BUT, the devastating part of this biblical axiom is that we have not, I  REPEAT, HAVE NOT physically heard from Jesus since His death in 33 AD!  This alone should bring pause to any Christian, therefore where Has Jesus been in the last 1990 years in physical communication with His Hebrew creation upon earth? “Poof,” Jesus is gone!  :(

The ONLY thing that is left to any Christian like myself is the word “faith” that Jesus existed, which oxymoronically in turn, is a firm belief in something for which there is no given proof.  As I have told this Religion Forum many times, I have to spuriously believe in Jesus because His words state unequivocally that there will be NO WOMEN in his glorious 1400 square mile heaven, where I say, this is because men had to put up with these biblically 2nd class women while upon earth, praise!

.
#30
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 390
1
2
7
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
Mr.BrotherD.Thomas
1
2
7
-->
@YouFound_Lxam


.

YouFound_Lxam,

YOUR QUOTE ON WHAT OR WHO CREATED THE UNIVERSE:  "Logically this force would have to be greater than any force we see today, both physically, emotionally, and atomically. Therefore, this force would have to have morals, and the ability to do everything humans do and more.Therefore, this is a personal force. So basically God. Now of course there is no perfect argument, but it's a pretty good one." 

Okay, then you are obviously talking about the Greek Gods  Chaos, Gaia, and Uranus, that created the universe and the world at approximately 700BC before the Christian God Jesus existed!  Therefore, when you have to accept these Greek Gods mentioned above were true to the Greeks, then in the same vein, Jesus was believed by the Hebrews as being their God.  BUT, as historically shown, the Greek Gods created the world and universe instead of Jesus!

I suggest whenever you mention the term "God," you should actually state which one you are talking about because there are many in the primitive Bronze and Iron Age, GET IT?!


NEXT PSEUDO-CHRISTIAN LIKE "YOUFOUND_LXAM" THAT HISTORICALLY IN A TIME LINE STATES THAT IT WAS THE GREEK GODS THAT CREATED THE UNIVERSE AND WORLD, AND NOT JESUS AS GOD, WILL BE ...?

.