Valid arguments?

[leafy]

I'm not looking to troll, but I'd like to hear some arguments for the existence of God. I've already heard these and found them unconvincing and/or invalid, unsound, or both.

1. Kalam Cosmological Argument
2. Ontological Argument
3. Teleological argument
4. Argument from design

I wish there were valid arguments I knew about. Being an atheist isn't something I would want to be - I want to know the truth. I wouldn't be an atheist if there was a valid argument that could be made for the existence of God. Whether I would worship him is another issue.

So, a challenge: Give me your favorite or best argument for the existence of your God (doesn't have to be the Christian god).

 

[billwald]

Sorry, there are only two possible answers to the problem of first cause: God and always was.

 

[Justaman0000]

How about the inexpressible joy one recieves when when they recieve the Holy spirit, when they ask Jesus Christ into their life. And not just one person but millions of people experience this, and revelations, and visions. And not everyone is led by a pastor but come to know God and are taught by the spirit, yet they all are in one likeness in mind, and they all have experienced the same thing. The sad thing is that anyone who hasn't recieved the Holy spirit won't understand what I'm talking about and can only mock us.

Also there are all the OT prophecies of the coming of the Messiah. You can't deny those and how they were fullfilled in Jesus Christ's life. God blessed and made himself known to the world through the Isreallites. They were his Holy people, but that doesn't mean he wasn't at work elswhere in the world.

It seems your are in a search for God, If your keep searching you will find him and he will make himself known. Just don't be stubborn and hardhearted when he makes himself known. Don't try to understand by your own understanding. Don't be closed minded.

 

[Washington]

I wish there were valid arguments I knew about. Being an atheist isn't something I would want to be - I want to know the truth. I wouldn't be an atheist if there was a valid argument that could be made for the existence of God. Whether I would worship him is another issue.

Just to avoid any complications that may arise in the thread.

It should be noted that a valid argument need not be a sound argument, which is what I think you're after. Validity only tells us that its form is acceptable, which allows for false premises. A sound argument has both components: validity and true premises.

 

[The Nihilist]

How about the inexpressible joy one recieves when when they recieve the Holy spirit, when they ask Jesus Christ into their life. And not just one person but millions of people experience this, and revelations, and visions. And not everyone is led by a pastor but come to know God and are taught by the spirit, yet they all are in one likeness in mind, and they all have experienced the same thing. The sad thing is that anyone who hasn't recieved the Holy spirit won't understand what I'm talking about and can only mock us.

Also there are all the OT prophecies of the coming of the Messiah. You can't deny those and how they were fullfilled in Jesus Christ's life. God blessed and made himself known to the world through the Isreallites. They were his Holy people, but that doesn't mean he wasn't at work elswhere in the world.

It seems your are in a search for God, If your keep searching you will find him and he will make himself known. Just don't be stubborn and hardhearted when he makes himself known. Don't try to understand by your own understanding. Don't be closed minded.

I can't decide whether your theology or your grammar is worse.

 

[Justaman0000]

grammar

 

[Wiccan_Child]

How about the inexpressible joy one recieves when when they recieve the Holy spirit, when they ask Jesus Christ into their life. And not just one person but millions of people experience this, and revelations, and visions. And not everyone is led by a pastor but come to know God and are taught by the spirit, yet they all are in one likeness in mind, and they all have experienced the same thing. The sad thing is that anyone who hasn't recieved the Holy spirit won't understand what I'm talking about and can only mock us.

Except that the same claim is made by people of all religions. You have people converting from every religion to every other religion.

Also there are all the OT prophecies of the coming of the Messiah. You can't deny those and how they were fullfilled in Jesus Christ's life.

Sure we can: they are only fulfilled if one considers the NT to be accurate. We do not.

It seems your are in a search for God, If your keep searching you will find him and he will make himself known. Just don't be stubborn and hardhearted when he makes himself known. Don't try to understand by your own understanding. Don't be closed minded.

So if we don't immediately convert, we must be close-minded and stubborn? Hmm, I smell false dichotomies on the horizon...

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Sorry, there are only two possible answers to the problem of first cause: God and always was.

The entire problem rests on the assumption that the universe needs a cause (or, more generally, that things with a beginning need a cause). This assumption is unjustified and, in light of modern advances, contrary to the evidence.

 

[Justaman0000]

So if we don't immediately convert, we must be close-minded and stubborn? Hmm, I smell false dichotomies on the horizon...

No I said don't be close minded when searching for God. I never said anything about immediately converting. read it again for what it says and quite making assumptions.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

No I said don't be close minded when searching for God. I never said anything about immediately converting. read it again for what it says and quite making assumptions.

I did. Your language implied a that those who search for God but don't find him are being close-minded.

What say you to those open-minded people who sought, but did not find?

 

[Justaman0000]

I did. Your language implied a that those who search for God but don't find him are being close-minded.

No, not all. but some are, I've met many.

What say you to those open-minded people who sought, but did not find?

Maybe they found him but wasn't what they expected. Maybe they only sought his hand and not his face. Or they may be lacking or have little belief, faith, or understanding.

theres a good parable that Jesus told that could help you understand what happens to some people that hear the word.


The Parable
1That same day Jesus went out of the house and sat by the lake. 2Such large crowds gathered around him that he got into a boat and sat in it, while all the people stood on the shore. 3Then he told them many things in parables, saying: "A farmer went out to sow his seed. 4As he was scattering the seed, some fell along the path, and the birds came and ate it up. 5Some fell on rocky places, where it did not have much soil. It sprang up quickly, because the soil was shallow. 6But when the sun came up, the plants were scorched, and they withered because they had no root. 7Other seed fell among thorns, which grew up and choked the plants. 8Still other seed fell on good soil, where it produced a crop—a hundred, sixty or thirty times what was sown. 9He who has ears, let him hear."

The explanation
18"Listen then to what the parable of the sower means: 19When anyone hears the message about the kingdom and does not understand it, the evil one comes and snatches away what was sown in his heart. This is the seed sown along the path. 20The one who received the seed that fell on rocky places is the man who hears the word and at once receives it with joy. 21But since he has no root, he lasts only a short time. When trouble or persecution comes because of the word, he quickly falls away. 22The one who received the seed that fell among the thorns is the man who hears the word, but the worries of this life and the deceitfulness of wealth choke it, making it unfruitful. 23But the one who received the seed that fell on good soil is the man who hears the word and understands it. He produces a crop, yielding a hundred, sixty or thirty times what was sown."

anyway, i'm done with this arguement. I don't like to argue so this is all I have to say. I hope this helps with what I was trying to say.

I hope you find an answer to what you are looking for leafy.

 

[bob135]

If you're patient, this one is kind of a long read:

http://www.calvin.edu/academic/phil...icles/plantinga_alvin/naturalism_defeated.pdf

I read a shorter summary. My understanding was he's saying naturalism is self defeating since it undermines belief in reliability of the senses, since naturalism selects mental states conducive to survival, not truth. Alternatively, God would give you senses that lead to true belief. Consequently, for a certain range of prior probabilities of God's existence, it makes sense to believe in God.

Of course if you're a strong atheist I don't think this or any other probability argument will work. However, you didn't specify that in the OP.

 

[JonF]

So, a challenge: Give me your favorite or best argument for the existence of your God (doesn't have to be the Christian god).

The Transcendental Argument is my fav.

 

[2ndRateMind]

Hey Leafy

First off, enjoy your agnosticism. You will be able to explore ideas free of the fear of damnation, and that represents a considerable freedom, I think. Go where ever you like, and investigate what seems to you to be good, and right, and true.

And that brings me to the moral argument for God's existence, that the good, and right, and true are not mere social convention, but brute, objective fact. If these concepts deteriorated into subjectivity, then whatever humanity pleased might be good, and right, and true. But the reality is that they are independent of both our individual and our collective preferences. And the place where they meet, and their optimum, the best, the most righteous, the absolutely true: why, that is God.

Finally, ignore this if you find it unhelpful. I found God this way, as morally supreme, but it may be that you have different interests, experience and heredity, and need to think through a more original approach.

Best wishes, pilgrim. 2RM.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

The Transcendental Argument is my fav.

Am I having a dumb moment, or does that article not actually say what the argument is?

EDIT: Turns out it's just the Ontological Argument

 

[JonF]

They are not the same

The ontological argument:
Define P to be a perfect being.
1. A necessary property of perfection is existance in the physical world.
2. Thus P must exist.
C. There exist a God.


The Transcendental Argument:
Transcendental arguments are as the link i provided says, any argument that apeals to: ", "I entitle transcendental all knowledge which is occupied not so much with objects as with the mode of our knowledge of objects insofar as this mode of knowledge is to be possible a priori." "

TAG go along these lines:
1. If we can prove that the non-existance of God rises to contradictions, we have proved the existance of God.
2. It is impossible to evaluate the non-existance of God, since belief in God is the only possible rational reason for many a priori principles, furthmore the only reason we can suppose that contradictions aren't possible in the real world is if God exist.
C. It is then rational to believe that God exist.

A specific example would be arguing that we only have reason to believe that the world is consistent, or logic is a universal principle iff God exist.