Traditional arguments for God's existence

Post Reply New Topic

Categories:

• Cosmological argument:
  Every known thing in the universe has a cause, so the universe itself has a cause and that cause is God, who is eternal.
  
• Teleological argument:
  From the subatomic level to astrophysics there is order and harmony. The cause of such order and harmony is God.
  
• Ontological argument:
  God is a being greater than which nothing can be imagined. It is greater to exist than not to exist. Thus, by definition, God exists.
  
• Moral argument:
  People have an inner sense of right and wrong (although people may desensitize themselves or rationalize certain actions.) People, when hearing of an injustice (e.g. murder, adultery, etc), have a need for justice to be done. The source of this inner sense and need is God.
  

There's more detail to each if you want to search them out, but these are the basic categories which most arguments for God's existence fit into.

I beleive in deity...not yours...
but its, well no one can back up the evidence 100% that there is no god/goddess whatever...
some things cannot be explained

I would go with cosmological.

The teleological will fail to get me to think because a universe that does not make sense is unimaginable and simply a matter of the unknowable. I mean, how can we know about how the universe could or could not be different?

The ontological proof seems like nonsense and BS to me.

The moral argument seems questionable given the variances in morality based upon cultural adaptation. There may be similarities in morality, but even then there are questions on evolutionary adaptation on some level of this morality(either biological or cultural as some traits will help the individual and others the tribe)

The cosmological proof still fails from my view but at least it goes back to something we know to be a problem and provides a solution. We don't know all of the details of the origins of reality. "God did it" ends up being a legitimate cause, not a legitimate theory perhaps, but there is more room for him there from my perspective.

I wouldn't think that the proofs of God are really that effective though at anything but helping Christians feel happy about their faith.

None of the above.
Don't think belief in God involves argument.
A God that is of any interest anyway.

Here's one you left out: Imagination. For without it existence of god cannot be proved. Man created god as a panacea for the jitters and to give him hope. The universe exists because it does. God exists in the minds of those that created him. Not the other way around. The earth is real because I can walk on it and feel it. The sun is real because I can see it. Th computer I am using is real because I can use it. But if I choose NOT to imagine your god's existence, because he/it can't be seen, touched, communicated to etc, then to me there is no god. Now let me put on my Judge Judy cloak here: where is the evidence to back up the existence of your god? Where is the forensic proof? The DNA? The eye-witness testimony? Don't quote from scripture... THAT'S HERESAY! I find the case of actual existence of god or Jehovah unproved, except in imagination; and I find judgement for the plaintiffs, who are just ordinary people.

I think teleology, when better constructed than I did, is actually about the most powerful. It encompasses Intelligent Design theory. Whereas Creation science is mainly showing the faults with evolution and has its Flood geology, ID has decided to go without naming God and show, particularly from the fundamental level of biology, chemistry, that even on that level it is complex and irreducibly so.

I would agree that the Ontological argument is worthless, it was made purely from philosophy. ;P

If you say imagination is proof, I imagine you don't exist.

I agree, none of them really provides a substantial evidence but it serves to define and confirm their faith, I suppose.

Yeah, it's not like you've seen your dad die and come back to life three times without medical help and through prayer.

Oh and Christians only? Jews also believe in the same God.

That was about those four arguments on how much proof they actually provide, and about 'miracles', some of them could be explained, like the out of body experience for example, and seeing "ghosts" or "shadows", those have been explained scientifically.

I don't deny sometimes that I wish, I really wish that miracles could happen, especially if we are facing an unpleasent situation, but then after giving it a logical approach, that works on a psychological level.

About that especifically case, I cannot say really, and I don't think I or anyone else should say anything related to it, wether their beliefs are, due to respect, I am not sure if I remember correctly that he is still here, if not, my condolescences.

Anyway, I don't deny related stuff, completely, but I put such things into doubt, because of the uncertainty approach, for me what lies after death is a mystery.


Yes, Jews and muslims too.

It was March 30th, 1999 when he was brought back to life three times: in the living room, walking to the car and in the car on the way to VA hospital in Dallas. He died last in medical hands 6:30 AM March 31st, 1999.

Not quite the same God. Jews and Christians share the Old Testament whereas the Qu'ran is a completely different book with completely different theology; to say that since were both monotheistic and thus share the same God would be a mistake. Christians and Jews also believe there's Satan, but we're not Zoroastrians because HaSatan (the accuser) is a created being and not on the level of a deity as YHWH is. Nor is God like Zeus or Deus because He is God alone. Are you getting this?

well, it seems that that was actually the origin of the devil or satan according to some scholars, being a deity in an ancient pagan religion and ancient judaism adopting the character into their new religion from their influence. Some sort of transition from politheism to henotheism and eventually monotheism.

Probably the same scholars that hold to the documentary hypothesis and the like but not all scholars nor the consensus of scholars.

Yeah, pretty much that may be an hypothesis, and yes, not all of them agree.

But the difference between me and this imagined 'god' is that you can see what I have been typing. I have not ever had a message from this god of yours, or seen it or even seen documented proof that it exists outside of the imaginings of man. Why do you think the Aborignes of Australia refer to their ancient times when they talk of their early religious experience as the 'Dreamtime'? Same could be sakd for Christianity and any other religion. And you trying to say I don't exist even though you know full well that my writing is proof of my existence proves how much your beliefs have clouded your judgement. As I said to you in an earlier post, if your parents had given you some proper textbooks instead of forcefeeding you with the bible during your homeschooling, then maybe you would be more enlightened. Oh, and BTW, the reason your father was brought back to life was because of the physicians around him and the machines they used to resuscitate him with. And the reason he finally succumbed was the fact that every human body has a finite lifespan, and it was time for him to go. That in itself proves non-existence of god, because your dad would still be walking around if your god had brought him back, going by your teachings. As I said, man made god and religion, not the other way around. Get over it and move on.

So your lack of an experience is proof of God's non-existence. That's convincing.