Best Argument For or Against God's Existence

[HitchSlap]

If there were no order, life as we know it would not exist.

How would you possibly even know this?

 

[HitchSlap]

Scientists use the term "evidence" because theories are largely based on educated guesses. This is why theories change based on relevant and new data. Proof is what it is and never changes.

Ok.

 

[Kirsten]

How would you possibly even know this?

The same reason you would. Reason.

 

[TillICollapse]

Scientists use the term "evidence" because theories are largely based on educated guesses. This is why theories change based on relevant and new data. Proof is what it is and never changes.

Can you give an example of what you consider as falling under the umbrella of "proof", contrasted with something related that you consider "evidence" ?

 

[HitchSlap]

The same reason you would. Reason.

It's unreasonable to assert something is, or is not, possible based on the notion you couldn't imagine it any other way.

 

[Kirsten]

It's unreasonable to assert something is, or is not, possible based on the notion you couldn't imagine it any other way.

Then reason has no value.

 

[Kirsten]

Can you give an example of what you consider as falling under the umbrella of "proof", contrasted with something related that you consider "evidence" ?

Evidence is a perceived bullet wound. Proof is the bullet found in the body.

 

[HitchSlap]

Then reason has no value.

Unreasonable conclusions have no value.

 

[HitchSlap]

Evidence is a perceived bullet wound. Proof is the bullet found in the body.

And if a bullet is never found, is the "perceived" wound no longer a wound?

 

[Davian]

If there were no order, life as we know it would not exist.

The weak anthropic principle is a tautology.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

That only applies within our understanding of time. The Creator exists outside of our understanding of time.

You seem to be very selective in deciding when the rules do and don't apply.

An intelligent designer can be deduced based on reason.

As I showed you, the same reason can be used to deduce another designer, and then another, and so on.

 

[SkyWriting]

Hello all,

In your opinion, what's the very best argument for the existence of God? Conversely, what's the top argument against the existence of God? Interested to hear your responses and subsequent reasoning. Thanks!

Hop in a space ship for a hundred thousand million light years or so.
When you get back, you'll say "Thank God!" and you'll really mean it for once in your life.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Although the trinity can be difficult to understand, it is not really logically incoherent. I think many people get confused about this because they try to find an analogy in nature that perfectly relates to God. But God is not like anything else in nature so one should not expect to find a totally sufficient analogy. The trinity can be explained as "one God who is three persons, or, to put it another way, there is one God who has three centers of self-consciousness: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Craig does a great job of explaining it in following link:

In other words, three gods - polytheism.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

The universe is the evidence.

The universe is evidence of the universe. In what way is it evidence of a deity?

Extra-biblically and outside of personal experience, at least. Check out the Kalam Cosmological Argument.

We already have several pages examining the KCA.

 

[Kirsten]

The weak anthropic principle is a tautology.

Philosophical musings bore me.

 

[Kirsten]

In other words, three gods - polytheism.

There is only one God. He is outside of our time, space and understanding. It is foolish to attempt to understand Him in our limited knowledge.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

There is only one God. He is outside of our time, space and understanding. It is foolish to attempt to understand Him in our limited knowledge.

Then why do Christians, Muslims, Jews, and various others claim to understand his nature, his personality, and even his intentions? In fact, given that it is "foolish" to even attempt to understand the divine, how can you claim that there is only one God?

 

[quatona]

Sure. The universe runs like a complicated machine.

So all you can bring to the table is question begging?
Let me try that, too:

Show me an example of an inanimate and unintelligent thing creating something like a car or airplane, for example.

Sure. The universe runs like a complicated machine.

Isn´t circular reasoning fun?

 

[Kirsten]

Then why do Christians, Muslims, Jews, and various others claim to understand his nature, his personality, and even his intentions? In fact, given that it is "foolish" to even attempt to understand the divine, how can you claim that there is only one God?

God claims He is One.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

God claims He is One.

Then let him come forth and defend that claim.