Come ye faithful and ye atheist rabble.

[BigBallinStalin]

What is the best argument for God?


Go forth and be productive. Tap into the division of labor! Quote from the best theologian and/or the best philosopher!


Let's have ourselves a jolly good show.


(or am I asking for too much from a faith-based system which insists that true knowledge can only be revealed, and that knowledge gained through reason--if contradictory--must be discarded cuz religion-God-Bible-and-stuff?)

[crispybits]

Argument for why one would be a good idea or argument for why one has to/has not to exist?

[john9blue]

most arguments for god have weaknesses. most arguments against those arguments have weaknesses too. it's an undecided question. there you go

[ManBungalow]

Why do we care?

[AndyDufresne]

--Andy

[nietzsche]

most arguments for god have weaknesses. most arguments against those arguments have weaknesses too. it's an undecided question. there you go

I'm picking this quote because you are my twin.

argument- a collection of words, using premises and logic.
god- some notion of something that created all that is. and tat rule us. and that will punish us if we misbehave.
arguments against arguments- collection of words, using premises and logic against other collection of words using premises and logic.


I have no answers.

It all starts with the premises you choose to start. That premise might be biased, might be truthful to the majority, might be just plain wrong, according to the majority. Then you use logic, which is the easy part.

Why do we care about god? Why does our experience calls for an omnipotent all-loving creator? Why people continue to seek him and find him? Why we (those who do not believe in a creator) take the time to refute the words typed by those defending god? Why are we bothered so much to do it? Why those who believe in him need so much to prove it to us? Are we (atheists) as wrong as them (believers) in getting in these discussions?

In the answer to these questions lie the most important lesson about us. By understanding and using that truth we can all better our lives.

Benedict de Spinoza, the same philosopher whose metaphysics are the base of the metaphysics of science, had a pantheistic view. And what is science but observation, testing and replication of what already is. Science doesn't write what it is, it merely describes it. So what atheist basing his grounds of science can do is only wait for believers to create their arguments and point to the flaws. And then they will point to the flaws in our refuting. And it all gets very boring and i wonder why don't we better jack off.


And finally, it all began with a belief.

Most modern atheist chose to believe in what they believe because it seems the truth. Because it's cool to be an atheist, it's all a web of beliefs and that fitted well in us. Believers, most likely, started with religious parents, and then the easiest road. However it started, there's no more validity to one belief or another, for they are the same, beliefs.

[AAFitz]

The best and only real argument for God, is that he could be there.

[AAFitz]

The best and only real argument for God, is that he* could be there.

*he=some force that created much if not all of what we see. Many variations and definitions are possible.

[crispybits]

Why do we care about god? Why does our experience calls for an omnipotent all-loving creator? Why people continue to seek him and find him? Why we (those who do not believe in a creator) take the time to refute the words typed by those defending god? Why are we bothered so much to do it? Why those who believe in him need so much to prove it to us? Are we (atheists) as wrong as them (believers) in getting in these discussions?

That's kinda the crux of the whole thing there. There's a group of people who for whatever reason(s) believe that life, the universe and everything has a purpose in a way we could say that me cooking my dinner has a purpose. There is a reason WHY all this is happening. Then there's another group of people that see that as a totally malformed question. We don't ask "what was the purpose of this earthquake or that hurricane or the fact it's sunny today instead of rainy". Nature simply is what it is, and purpose is a human construct much like justice or beauty.

Given human nature is to anthropomorphise things that aren't remotely human-like, and to see patterns in random sequences, I believe that the theists are on shaky ground using purely a priori synthetic "experience" to justify their belief, but that's their call if they want to waste their time and energy doing that. My problem is when they try to use their imaginary authority to influence my life, or in a broader sense when they brainwash children to follow their belief systems before they are old enough to understand what is happening and what they are being told to think. That's why I spend my time arguing against it.

[Ray Rider]

(or am I asking for too much from a faith-based system which insists that true knowledge can only be revealed, and that knowledge gained through reason--if contradictory--must be discarded cuz religion-God-Bible-and-stuff?)

Never heard that before...what church did you go to?

Why do we care about god? Why does our experience calls for an omnipotent all-loving creator? Why people continue to seek him and find him? Why we (those who do not believe in a creator) take the time to refute the words typed by those defending god? Why are we bothered so much to do it? Why those who believe in him need so much to prove it to us?

Just to pick out a couple of things, if you felt that you knew for certain that there was a massive tsunami coming that was going to wipe out your city, would you not speak to your neighbours and everyone around you to warn them of the impending disaster, and especially of how to avoid it? Would it not be extremely heartless and uncaring not to do so?

Are we (atheists) as wrong as them (believers) in getting in these discussions?

Since when is it "wrong" to engage in a discussion? On the contrary, I think it's beneficial to both sides to debate with those who disagree or else we'll all stay within our own little clique of people who think like us, and before you know it we'll all start thinking those who disagree are inhuman unthinking monsters out to destroy the world. Dialogue bridges the gap between opposing worldviews and allows us to see things (a little bit, anyway) from another person's perspective.

Believers, most likely, started with religious parents, and then the easiest road. However it started, there's no more validity to one belief or another, for they are the same, beliefs.

I would disagree; I know of plenty of people who turned to Christianity from atheism or other religions. Actually some of them are the strongest proponents of Christianity. Btw your last sentence reminded me of the Life of Pi movie...although I disagreed with the philosophy throughout the story, it was still a pretty good movie!

[2dimes]

or am I asking for too much from a faith-based system which insists that true knowledge can only be revealed,

Maybe. All my really good stuff can even be argued as good luck by myself and I was the one that experienced it first hand.

[jonesthecurl]

The best and only real argument for God, is that he could be there.

Well, I left a bunch of voicemails and he never answered.

[Maugena]

Best argument for god?
@Stoicism
-The universe and god are one.

I'd say that's the most sensible argument. (If that can be called an argument...)

Not that I believe that... because I don't.

[chang50]

The best and only real argument for God, is that he could be there.

And the only excuse for a loving personal God is that he doesn't exist.

[Gillipig]

ERROR....Firefox can not find a value for the search term "Best argument for god"