Brennan77
Well-known member
Offline
If you use the term atheist to describe yourself, I invite you to answer this question. Even though you disagree, what do you find the most compelling argument in favor of the existence of God?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I believe we could have some sort of maker, or creator, but its not some deity that wants us to worship it and it's none of the "religions" man created. More of a clock-maker god, similar to what the founders believed.
The complexity of life and how life can organize from the chaos in the universe makes me believe its not all "accident" but I dont think anyone is listening to or answering any "prayers."
I think a definition of "god" needs to be presented first, then an argument made for that god's existence.
If we are referring to an intelligent being outside the physical realm who created everything ever, I don't find any argument for such a being compelling.
Ok. Which of the common arguments for theism do you find to be least bad?
You'd still need to define what "god" is, but I guess the least bad would be, asking about the possibility of the existence of a god; is it possible, however infinitesimally, that a god exists somewhere in the unknown universe/another dimension?
Right, so I'm talking about classic, typically philosophical arguments for the monotheistic God, which most people understand logically excludes whatever you mean by "a god" existing within some physical realm or universe. We aren't talking about Zeus or an alien being in another dimension, of which I am unaware of any natural arguments to consider in the first place.
Part of the reason I pose the question in the original post is to explore what we know of the arguments against our stated positions. So rather than detail many definitions and arguments, I am asking you, the atheist, presumably having already considered the major arguments for theism, which one you find most reasonable or compelling, or in this case which one you find least bad. You may not be familiar with these arguments or be able to retrieve them out of memory which is okay to share as well.
So, instead, why you just don't go ahead and ask about the Christian God?
My original replies come from knowing that other religions Hinduism, Sikhim, Taosim, etc
they all have their creators, and for discussing those creators with them.
Of course it does.I have to say that your first question doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Your comments would suggest that you are conflating all beliefs in anything supernatural with a philosophical consideration of theism. If you aren't willing to grant substantial and qualitative differences there won't be much to discuss, but that seems to me obtuse.
Inasmuch as one is considering monotheism, you're considering the same Being, logically speaking.
Without getting into listing common arguments for the existence of God or specific divine attributes, which I am deliberately avoiding so as to allow space for people to share their thoughts, I guess I'd just ask you the question again. Which argument for God's existence do you find most compelling (or least bad)? If your answer is truly that you think they are all equally bad, we'll just leave it at that I suppose.
First off, I am not sure I consider myself an athiest. But I also don't like the term agnostic, and I am not willing to say I am a theist. Maybe I am just really confused?
I consider myself an empiricist. Therefore the best argument for the existence of God is the large number of people who have experienced/encountered God.
As I have gotten older I have moved past the sort of philosophical arguments for the existence of God in favor of a more experiential view.Thanks for sharing. It's an interesting thought from the perspective of empiricism.
I consider myself an empiricist. Therefore the best argument for the existence of God is the large number of people who have experienced/encountered God.
How do you know anyone sees what they claim to see, or tastes what they say they taste . . . ?How do you know they actually have experienced/encountered any god?
How do you know anyone sees what they claim to see, or tastes what they say they taste . . . ?
As I have gotten older I have moved past the sort of philosophical arguments for the existence of God in favor of a more experiential view.
There seems to be a gulf between the priestly/academic caste pontificating about God's existence and the bulk of people actually experiencing God.