Best Argument For or Against God's Existence

[Davian]

Jesus actually created everything so they are covered.

19 because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them.
20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse.

Invisible things that are clearly seen? Is that like Wonder Woman's jet?

 

[Davian]

There are hints, but history is all conjecture and faith.

Religion is all conjecture and faith.

 

[Davian]

I do. It's like water. 3 forms. Solid, Liquid, or a Gas. (I'd like to thank the actor who played Jesus at that place in the movie Religulous.)

FYI, "water" is only a liquid.

 

[Davian]

You not only leave your body behind, but you are alone there as well.

How can "I" exist without my body?

 

[Davian]

There is a "fire" but it's not your body burning (That stays in your coffin.)
What burns is your conscience.
You burn with regret and no body to right any wrongs.
Any unkind word, deed, or selfish thought.
What if you only said one unkind thing in your life?
Without accepting God's forgiveness, you get to dwell just on that one incident.
Is that less painful than 2 such incidents? I would think not.

Coffee Mug Far Side Just Not Reaching That Guy

• Davian
• Nov 7, 2012

 

[Joshua260]

The purpose of the argument is not merely to establish that the universe had a cause, but that the cause is a personal creator god. The unstated conclusion in the above argument is that "God is the cause of the universe's existence." That is the version we have been discussing. If you want to omit this conclusion from the discussion from this point on, then the KCA ceases to be relevant to the topic.

You couldn't be more wrong.
A. The purpose of the KCA I advocate is to determine if it is reasonable to believe that the universe had a cause.
This is analogous to testing out the gloves in the OJ Simpson trial to see if the stain on them is really blood.

B. Now analyzing the traits of the cause of the universe narrows down the list to:
1. The Christian god
2. The Muslim god
3. The Jewish god
4. A mean god
5. (From other suggestions) An immaterial being pretending to be a Flying Spaghetti Monster.
6. (From other suggestions) An immaterial being pretending to be an Eternal Flame.
This is analogous to listing the possible suspects who belong in the gene pool of the blood cited in A.

From these two pieces of evidence alone, one cannot prove that the blood is really OJ's, but it rules out a whole bunch of other candidates.

This thread doesn't seem to require that I provide proof positive that God created the universe. So supporting arguments are allowed, and the KCA is one of the best.

The conclusion of the version you advocate is Goddidit.

If you can read black print on white paper you will not find the phrase "God did it" in the following conclusion of the KCA that I advocate:
"Therefore, the universe has a cause for it's existence."

I find this utterly amazing coming from you. You would actually have me agree with you that my version of the KCA ends with the conclusion of "Therefore, God did it" and thus purposefully commit a logical fallacy. Speaking for myself, I would rather make an intellectually honest argument than win a debate. As I said above, I do not claim that the KCA provides proof positive that God created the universe. I only offer it as supporting evidence for that belief.

 

[Davian]

There is a "fire" but it's not your body burning (That stays in your coffin.)
What burns is your conscience.<snip>

It is my understanding that my conscience is a mental process of my brain; with my body dead, there is no me, no conscience. Your story makes no sense.

 

[SkyWriting]

But does not require the existence of actual gods.

"...we do something other animals do not do. As large-brained hominids with a developed cortex and a theory of mind—the capacity to be aware of such mental states as desires and intentions in both ourselves and others—we infer agency behind the patterns we observe in a practice I call “agenticity”: the tendency to believe that the world is controlled by invisible intentional agents. We believe that these intentional agents control the world, sometimes invisibly from the top down (as opposed to bottom-up causal randomness). Together patternicity and agenticity form the cognitive basis of shamanism, paganism, animism, polytheism, monotheism, and all modes of Old and New Age spiritualisms."

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/skeptic-agenticity/

The man is describing a belief in God. Note that he offers no natural reason
for mans highly developed mind to go into a fantasy mode. He even has to
make up his own words due to a lack of logical support for his notion.

 

[Davian]

...
B. Now analyzing the traits of the cause of the universe narrows down the list to:
1. The Christian god
2. The Muslim god
3. The Jewish god
4. (From other suggestions) An immaterial being pretending to be a Flying Spaghetti Monster.
5. (From other suggestions) An immaterial being pretending to be an Eternal Flame.
...

Pretending? Where did you get that?

Better add to your list "An immaterial being pretending to be a Christian god" etc.

 

[Joshua260]

Ok. Say we all agree with the KCA. Let's get to the god part.

Yes. If you mean the Christian god, he is listed among a few candidates (I counted 6 so far, although some of these may really be the same and just perceived to be different) as the cause for the existence of the universe.

 

[Davian]

The man is describing a belief in God. Note that he offers no natural reason
for mans highly developed mind to go into a fantasy mode. He even has to
make up his own words due to a lack of logical support for his notion.

If you cannot demonstrate the existence of gods, they remain - in your words - fantasy.

 

[SkyWriting]

It is my understanding that my conscience is a mental process of my brain; with my body dead, there is no me, no conscience. Your story makes no sense.

I could eat my neighbor, people may kill me in retaliation.
In the end, my actions and thoughts have no consequences.
My death is the end, so what would it matter?

Under that world view, my explanation would make no sense.
Understandable.

 

[bhsmte]

I could eat my neighbor, people may kill me in retaliation.
In the end, my actions and thoughts have no consequences.
My death is the end, so what would it matter?

Under that world view, my explanation would make no sense.
Understandable.

If someone else killing you because you ate your neighbor is of no consequence, then yea, sure.

 

[Joshua260]

Pretending? Where did you get that?

Better add to your list "An immaterial being pretending to be a Christian god" etc.

What I meant by "pretending" is that some have claimed that the FSM and the Eternal Flame are immaterial beings. Since I pointed out that their descriptions include being made from material substances that exists in this universe and that it is incoherent that a thing could cause itself to come into existence, some have admittedly modified their claim that what they really meant is that they are immaterial beings that pretend (or better yet "manifest themselves") to be a material FSM or Eternal Flame.

Yes, it is possible that an immaterial being is pretending to be the Christian god.

 

[Davian]

What I meant by "pretending" is that some have claimed that the FSM and the Eternal Flame are immaterial beings. Since I pointed out that their descriptions include being made from material substances that exists in this universe and that it is incoherent that a thing could cause itself to come into existence, some have admittedly modified their claim that what they really meant is that they are immaterial beings that pretend (or better yet "manifest themselves") to be a material FSM or Eternal Flame.

"Pretend" implies deception, as in "I closed my eyes and pretended I was asleep". Do try to remain neutral at this point.

Yes, it is possible that an immaterial being is pretending to be the Christian god.

"An immaterial being pretending to be a Christian god". There are many variations, and they cannot all be right.

 

[SkyWriting]

If you cannot demonstrate the existence of gods, they remain - in your words - fantasy.

God is Spirit.
And we all know from watching Ghost chasers
that spirits don't show well on camcorders.

 

[Davian]

I could eat my neighbor, people may kill me in retaliation.
In the end, my actions and thoughts have no consequences.
My death is the end, so what would it matter?

Atheism is not nihilism.

Under that world view, my explanation would make no sense.

What "world view"? Reality? Science?

Understandable.

A fallacious appeal to consequences?

 

[Davian]

God is Spirit.
And we all know from watching Ghost chasers
that spirits don't show well on camcorders.

What is "spirit"? How do we delineate that from "imaginary"?

 

[SkyWriting]

How can "I" exist without my body?

Like when your dreaming for instance?

 

[SkyWriting]

Atheism is not nihilism.

It's not even a thing.