Does God Exist?

[EddieAllenPoe]

That's the simple question that I'm pondering right now. Simply, "Does God Exist?" I was recently pondering "God and Suicide", but I came to realize this was way too broad and complex of a subject.

It seems apparent to me that asking if God exists is not a simple question. Afterall, what is meant by the word "God"? How could I know if such a being or thing exists? What is the nature of this "God"?

Also, If "God" does exist, what is the nature of this God? What if there is a "God" but he turns out to be evil?

Someone else on this website once stated that we exist because: "Experimenters created the simulation for their fucked up torture experiment." Some people may simply laugh at this statement, but I think it's a valid concern. Afterall, many of us are not happy about our existence. Why are we here? Who is responsible? Simply existing drives many of us to consider suicide. What if this "God" exists and he is evil?

Others on this website have suggested that "God" is a myth and that religion invented the concept in order to control human behavior. I think this could also be a valid possibility. Did we simply invent the concept of "God"? How would a person go about finding the truth?

There are many questions a person could ask but I'm going to back up and simply ponder: "Does God Exist?"

Simply saying "Yes, there is a God" or "No, there is no God" has no meaning unless we first define what "God" means in the first place. Once we have a good definition of "God", we are then better able to either confirm or deny their existence.

Since I was raised Christian, I was first introduced to the concept of "God" through the Christian religion. For this reason I will explore this question by listening to a debate between a Christian Theist and an Atheist. The particular debate I am focusing on today will be a debate between William Lane Craig and Christopher Hitchens.

If you have a couple hours today, I hope you get a chance to listen to this debate. I'd be curious to hear your own thoughts about it.

Who do you think presents a stronger argument? William Lane Craig or Christopher Hitchens? Why?

 

[Daniel123]

If we talk about Chistian God is it very unlikely simply due to so many imperfections in my opinion. Why create universe with all kind of natural disasters, illnesses not to mention that "we" animals have to eat each other to survive.

How did it all started and from what is simply out of our reach, we will never know.

 

[weargon]

I've read and heard thousands of excellent reasons why God, especially the Christian God, doesn't exist, and is an archaic belief from our early origins. It's hard to pick each one even. On the other hand, I've heard very few compelling arguments why God would exist, and almost none of them stand up to lots of thought and reason.

You have to remember the roots of these beliefs. People didn't know micro organisms exist and believed one got sick from doing bad deed. People thought lightning was god. Man thought the whole world was all that was out there and the universe revolves around it. And so on. When you really consider how much stupid nonsense formed the foundation of these beliefs, the whole idea collapses.

 

[EddieAllenPoe]

I've read and heard thousands of excellent reasons why God, especially the Christian God, doesn't exist, and is an archaic belief from our early origins. It's hard to pick each one even. On the other hand, I've heard very few compelling arguments why God would exist, and almost none of them stand up to lots of thought and reason.

You have to remember the roots of these beliefs. People didn't know micro organisms exist and believed one got sick from doing bad deed. People thought lightning was god. Man thought the whole world was all that was out there and the universe revolves around it. And so on. When you really consider how much stupid nonsense formed the foundation of these beliefs, the whole idea collapses.

I don't think it's always stupid nonsense. The most compelling argument I've heard for the existence of God came from Thomas Aquinas. Primarily when he analyzes the logical reason for believing in a first cause. Because it doesn't make sense that an infinite chain of events could exist. It can actually be demonstrated that the universe would have to have a beginning.

The belief that all of time and space suddenly moved into existence from nothing seems unreasonable. There had to be a beginning. The thought that all life came into existence by chance would also seem highly improbable. I'm not really disputing scientific processes like evolution. I've read two of Richard Dawkin's books called The Blind Watchmaker and The Selfish Gene. I don't doubt it can be a blind, naturalistic process. But it has the markings of a well designed machine.

The best non-theistic explanations I've seen for how this could be comes from proponents of the Multiverse. That idea is that there are an infinite number of universes and we just happen to live in the one where life came into existence. The problem with this belief though is it requires faith to believe and there is no proof. It's funny because theoretical physicists will often invent more and more theoretical particles to support a belief in a Multiverse while still having absolutely zero evidence . A multiverse also suffers from the same sort of logical problems stemming from a belief in infinite.

Does any of this mean I can automatically jump to a belief in a creator God? Not really. It doesn't even seem to prove it's a Christian god. That's a whole different debate. But it doesn't seem unreasonable to believe there could have been an intelligent designer. I don't think it's so simple to just call it stupid nonsense.

 

[marcusuk63]

He`s not on Facebook so the answer is no
If it seems improbable that life just life came from nothingness then where did "God" come from ? (any of the 3,000 Gods there are )

 

[weargon]

He`s not on Facebook so the answer is no
If it seems improbable that life just life came from nothingness then where did "God" come from ? (any of the 3,000 Gods there are )

Hah, this reminds me of a religious debate I had with a random black dude who was a Jahova's Witness that came up to me when I was working on some guy's truck one day. We struggled for 20+ minutes with all sorts of arguments and he kind of had that "I know you are but what am I" way of taking every point. Everything was bouncing off. It was like arguing with a 5 year old but I have a bad habit of enjoying difficult discussions. Eventually he goes, see that house you're working on front of? It had to have a creator. And I said, oh yeah? So if everything has to have a creator, who created your creator? It was as if someone put a wrench that locked up his giant machine of ignorance. Guy shut down and disappeared in a flash. That was a good day lol.

 

[EddieAllenPoe]

He`s not on Facebook so the answer is no
If it seems improbable that life just life came from nothingness then where did "God" come from ? (any of the 3,000 Gods there are )

It's a good question. I don't know. I don't even know if I can know. I believe in the Aquinas school of thought it is believed God exists because he IS being itself. He's non-temporal. Meaning that he is outside of time and space and thus independent of causation.

It actually makes more sense to me to believe something somewhere IS being because I can witness things having being. I can't witness a nothingness. The idea of ZERO is useful when I'm saying there are ZERO oranges but I've never literally witnessed an orange being nothingness. It's just a way with words that has no actual basis in reality. There is only somethingness. Thus I would be less inclined to believe we came from nothingness. I have no evidence of a nothingness. Afterall, I am not nothing. I exist. I'm something. I have specific attributes and values. My body has specific dimensions. I have a certain number of fingers. I'm not a zero.

Which God or gods? That's a totally different debate. I guess you'd have to examine what evidence we have to believe any such a God or gods have revealed their self. I'm less convinced you could know something like this but I supposed it's not impossible.

 

[weargon]

I don't think it's always stupid nonsense. The most compelling argument I've heard for the existence of God came from Thomas Aquinas. Primarily when he analyzes the logical reason for believing in a first cause. Because it doesn't make sense that an infinite chain of events could exist. It can actually be demonstrated that the universe would have to have a beginning.

The belief that all of time and space suddenly moved into existence from nothing seems unreasonable. There had to be a beginning. The thought that all life came into existence by chance would also seem highly improbable. I'm not really disputing scientific processes like evolution. I've read two of Richard Dawkin's books called The Blind Watchmaker and The Selfish Gene. I don't doubt it can be a blind, naturalistic process. But it has the markings of a well designed machine.

The best non-theistic explanations I've seen for how this could be comes from proponents of the Multiverse. That idea is that there are an infinite number of universes and we just happen to live in the one where life came into existence. The problem with this belief though is it requires faith to believe and there is no proof. It's funny because theoretical physicists will often invent more and more theoretical particles to support a belief in a Multiverse while still having absolutely zero evidence . A multiverse also suffers from the same sort of logical problems stemming from a belief in infinite.

Does any of this mean I can automatically jump to a belief in a creator God? Not really. It doesn't even seem to prove it's a Christian god. That's a whole different debate. But it doesn't seem unreasonable to believe there could have been an intelligent designer. I don't think it's so simple to just call it stupid nonsense.

We can't even begin comprehend the size of the universe or what billions of years feels like. Sure we can watch cool youtube videos showing you the scale of things but we'll never be able to truly grasp the picture, because to us a decade feels like eternity.

I fail to understand how anyone can read Dawkins books and get into this discussion so much still has even a slight belief that there's a chance something created the universe. The idea is childish. It's more ludicrous to imagine some deity created everything than to believe it could have either always existed or happened by chance. The former requires a lot more wishful thinking.

The reason it's ok to still call it stupid nonsense is it's a primitive idea going back to humans most primitive stage. Humans would prefer some explanation rather to none. No matter how irrational that explanation is.

 

[EddieAllenPoe]

We can't even begin comprehend the size of the universe or what billions of years feels like. Sure we can watch cool youtube videos showing you the scale of things but we'll never be able to truly grasp the picture, because to us a decade feels like eternity.

I fail to understand how anyone can read Dawkins books and get into this discussion so much still has even a slight belief that there's a chance something created the universe. The idea is childish. It's more ludicrous to imagine some deity created everything than to believe it could have either always existed or happened by chance. The former requires a lot more wishful thinking.

The reason it's ok to still call it stupid nonsense is it's a primitive idea going back to humans most primitive stage. Humans would prefer some explanation rather to none. No matter how irrational that explanation is.

Calling it childish is a simplistic value judgement. It's easy to just not think about it and call a belief in an intelligent designer stupid nonsense. You don't have to think as I do, but I don't think you've really given it any thought.

I think it's more likely that you simply can't fathom the the improbability of our universe randomly existing as it does. This doesn't surprise me. It's for the same reason that most people play the lottery. They often tend to believe their chance of winning is greater than it really is. When it comes to the improbability of our universe being the way that it is, it goes WAY beyond the odds of winning the lottery.

This is an old argument... but if you walked along a beach and saw a Rolex watch lying there, I doubt you would immediately assume it came into being because atoms randomly aligned and formed a Rolex watch. You'd believe it was manufactured and a person placed that watch there. You look at the most complex machinery in existence frolicking on planet earth every day. Why would you automatically assume it just randomly came into being? To me that seems childish. I don't have anything to sell you. I'm not a Jehovah Witness trying to sell you a bible. I'm just saying its actually quite reasonable to assume there was an intelligent designer.

 

[weargon]

What's the motive for an "intelligent designer" to create countless galaxies and planets in them, for one tiny place to be hospitable and mean anything?

Believing some magical deity did all of this has more relevance to playing the lottery than not believing.

Oh boy here we go with the watchmaker argument. I'm going to stop feeding this nonsense right now because you're starting to sound like a Christian door knocker. Go read all the rebuttals out there to that argument, it's been covered countless times.

Humans started out believing everything had a spirit. Then we narrowed it down to many gods. Then we narrowed it down to one. We keep getting closer to the true answer all the time.. 0. I'm sure you've heard this point made by Hitchens in many debates. We don't need god to explain anything on earth, so your argument is stuck to the last frontier of the unknown, space... simply because we still haven't understood everything about it, you seme to think it validates your belief some deity made it despite lack of a clear motive. See the big picture here. Look at the connected steps, where the first one started (believing every rock had a spirit) and where the last one you're stuck on is (rolex beaches).

 

[Deadgirl]

There's no inductive proof that God is real. All of these so called proofs from theists are just beliefs or hypothesis that have never been proven.

 

[weargon]

There's no inductive proof that God is real. All of these so called proofs from theists are just beliefs or hypothesis that have never been proven.

Well put.

 

[EddieAllenPoe]

What's the motive for an "intelligent designer" to create countless galaxies and planets in them, for one tiny place to be hospitable and mean anything?

Believing some magical deity did all of this has more relevance to playing the lottery than not believing.

Oh boy here we go with the watchmaker argument. I'm going to stop feeding this nonsense right now because you're starting to sound like a Christian door knocker. Go read all the rebuttals out there to that argument, it's been covered countless times.

You really find this upsetting, don't you? It's nothing to get all ruffled about. It really isn't. They're just ideas. You don't have to agree or believe the same as me. I'm just presenting why it's not unreasonable to believe in an intelligence designer. You're jumping all over the place and resorting to name calling. Chill. You'll survive this.

 

[weargon]

They're not ideas, they're archaic beliefs. They're no more exciting or fresh than female genital mutilation or public beheadings. Christian door knocker is name calling? Sensitive much?

I do find it upsetting that someone can read those books and watch those debates, and still believe the tooth fairy abra cadabra-ed the whole universe. It doesn't add any points to my faith in humanity.

 

[EddieAllenPoe]

There's no inductive proof that God is real. All of these so called proofs from theists are just beliefs or hypothesis that have never been proven.

Did you have a specific one in mind? Or do I just assume all of them.

 

[weargon]

 

[EddieAllenPoe]

They're not ideas, they're archaic beliefs. They're no more exciting or fresh than female genital mutilation or public beheadings. Christian door knocker is name calling? Sensitive much?

Yeah. "Magical deity", "Childish", "Christian door knocker". Now "archaic". Somehow we're jumping into female genital mutilation. I'm familiar. I've read Ayaan Hirsi Ali. I know the concerns. But WTF. What does that have to do with what anything I'm talking about? This is an emotional reaction and not an intelligent conservation. You're honestly not offending me. I think it's funny. But the way you're going about this is not persuasive.

 

[weargon]

So which of your "ideas" has been proven to demonstrate the existence of an "intelligent designer"?

How tf is magical deity offensive? That's basically what you're arguing. Children believe in fairy tales and you're backing a major one up as well so that's also not offensive. Your argument is very archaic and that's a fact. Nothing personal about it.

 

[Deadgirl]

Did you have a specific one in mind? Or do I just assume all of them.

Yes i mean all of them especially Islam and christianity.

 

[weargon]

If you need a super organized and structured break down of your intelligent designer, then you should read The Natural Atheism. It's a bit boring of a book to some but maybe it will help you realize things.

Natural Atheism: Eller, David: 9781578849208: Books - Amazon

Natural Atheism [Eller, David] on Amazon.com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. Natural Atheism

www.amazon.com

 

[Exile]

@weargon I think I'm in love with you.

 

[marcusuk63]

Religion is about control and $$$$ £££ .The Church of England alone makes more money than McDonald's. ... It is sitting on a combination of ancient endowments and investments worth £8.3bn . yet the small church down my street got a £400k lottery grant for a new roof while children are going without food

 

[EddieAllenPoe]

Yes i mean all of them especially Islam and christianity.

I meant argument against a belief. Saying "all of them are wrong" is a fun opinion but it's not intelligible. What does that even mean? Why should I believe you? Are you some kind of atheistic prophet? Are you channeling knowledge directly to the masses? That's no different than statements made by most of religion. It would make more sense if there was a specific idea you thought was false and you provided a persuasive reason for why.

 

[RodgerThat]

I fucking hope not or I'm going to hell, as we all are.

 

[EddieAllenPoe]

I fucking hope not or I'm going to hell, as we all are.

Holy shit. Really? Damn. That's harsh. How do you know something like that?

Oh wait. Nevermind. There is no God. Because @Deadgirl said so.

 

[RodgerThat]

How do you know something like that?

If He exists in the biblical sense and we are to take the teachings of the Bible and the such at least somewhat literally, we have all committed countless sins, one of which will (hopefully) be suicide, as it is desecration of His creation.
If, like I believe, He doesn't exist or the biblical teachings are speculation or simply made up and based on loose principals, then it doesn't matter, because the legitimate rules he would have put in place are very likely to be very different from what has eventually been imposed upon the population hundreds or thousands of years later, as those in power would be eager to implement new rules to keep people in order, just under the guise of the word of God and the promise of paradise, and the fear of Hell or damnation.

 

[Jean Améry]

Calling it childish is a simplistic value judgement. It's easy to just not think about it and call a belief in an intelligent designer stupid nonsense. You don't have to think as I do, but I don't think you've really given it any thought.

I think it's more likely that you simply can't fathom the the improbability of our universe randomly existing as it does. This doesn't surprise me. It's for the same reason that most people play the lottery. They often tend to believe their chance of winning is greater than it really is. When it comes to the improbability of our universe being the way that it is, it goes WAY beyond the odds of winning the lottery.

This is an old argument... but if you walked along a beach and saw a Rolex watch lying there, I doubt you would immediately assume it came into being because atoms randomly aligned and formed a Rolex watch. You'd believe it was manufactured and a person placed that watch there. You look at the most complex machinery in existence frolicking on planet earth every day. Why would you automatically assume it just randomly came into being? To me that seems childish. I don't have anything to sell you. I'm not a Jehovah Witness trying to sell you a bible. I'm just saying its actually quite reasonable to assume there was an intelligent designer.

It's not reasonable at all and this 'watchmaker argument' has already been refuted by Hume, Darwin and Dawkins. You christians rehash the same old sophisms for lack of actual arguments and actual evidence of your imaginary deity. If he exists prove it. That no-one in the history of the planet has ever been able to do so tells me everything I need: there is no god except in gullible people's heads. People wish to believe therefore in their mind their god is real.

The only difference between pathological delusions and religious beliefs is the number of believers.

You are selling something: your completely unfounded christian beliefs dressed up as philosophy. Is this actually going somewhere? A religious condemnation of suicide perhaps?

 

[Omega7]

He`s not on Facebook so the answer is no
If it seems improbable that life just life came from nothingness then where did "God" come from ? (any of the 3,000 Gods there are )

That wouldn't make God, God..

 

[weargon]

Nothing "intelligent", would "design" something that's 99.99999999% (don't quote me on the math, you get the point) useless, for some insignificant amount of life somewhere. The amount of planets, galaxies, the amount of time (past/future), only goes to show how probable the possibility of us existing by chance are, vs the chances that all of this pointless stuff is somehow part of an "intelligent design".

The one argument/thought/idea that always intrigues me is, if religious people truly... TRULY believed all their nonsense, why wouldn't they all be catching the bus the minute they learn their story? I mean wouldn't you want to just cheat or find a loophole to skip the first boring level and go to the fun stuff afterwards? You don't see any Christians praising a person who just rode over their kids on the street for giving them a head start on heaven. Deep down, everyone knows it's bs. It's just more about how far some people go to lie to themselves about it. Theism is a convenient lie lie to one self, to use as a mental cushion, when dealing with trauma or injustice.

 

[Walilamdzi]

It depends what you mean by the word God, but in the sense used by organised religion, definitely not.