What's your best argument for God's existence?

Author: Sum1hugme ,

Topic's posts

Posts in total: 372
  • Sum1hugme
    Sum1hugme avatar
    Debates: 14
    Forum posts: 493
    2
    3
    8
    Sum1hugme avatar
    Sum1hugme
    I'm curious if there's one I haven't heard yet. And....go!
  • ludofl3x
    ludofl3x avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 1,323
    3
    2
    2
    ludofl3x avatar
    ludofl3x
    "bible says so"  if you're talking about the Christian version. I'm just giving you the spark notes version of most of the arguments you're going to get. You'll also see a lot of "how else could this have happened?", which is arguing from incredulity. 
  • Sum1hugme
    Sum1hugme avatar
    Debates: 14
    Forum posts: 493
    2
    3
    8
    Sum1hugme avatar
    Sum1hugme
    --> @ludofl3x
      Yeah, well I'm hoping there'll be one I haven't heard.
  • Ragnar
    Ragnar avatar
    Debates: 35
    Forum posts: 1,842
    5
    8
    10
    Ragnar avatar
    Ragnar
    --> @Sum1hugme
    I’ve seen enough miracles which are better explained by God than random chance and predetermination.

    Granted, this is why I believe, not a declaration that others must believe.

  • Sum1hugme
    Sum1hugme avatar
    Debates: 14
    Forum posts: 493
    2
    3
    8
    Sum1hugme avatar
    Sum1hugme
    --> @Ragnar
    Well that's interesting. How do you determine what constitutes a miracle?
  • Stephen
    Stephen avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 4,312
    3
    2
    2
    Stephen avatar
    Stephen
    --> @Sum1hugme
    Yeah, well I'm hoping there'll be one I haven't heard.

     Well you'd have thought after thousands of years that all bases would have been covered.
    And I suppose there was a time when they had them covered. When it was for the church  much more simpler  in past times of illiteracy, ignorance and fear, when priests faced less doubt and no opposition to the total control  they had of a persons daily life and a much tighter grip of the human conscience and  when the churchmen were able to steal vulnerable widows houses, but alas there are legal experts that have taken over that roll today. 
    Christian churchmen cannot burn anyone at the stake any longer. There are no ducking stools for accusations made against mainly women of witchcraft and sorcery,  And no rejoicing  and "happiness"   for " the one who seizes your infants and dashes them against the rocks". Psalm 137:9  The good ole' days eh,  they mush be sorely missed.

    But whatever these excuses are today, they will all boil down to the  preselected option adopted in the days of old mentioned at post #2 above. 




  • fauxlaw
    fauxlaw avatar
    Debates: 54
    Forum posts: 2,062
    4
    6
    10
    fauxlaw avatar
    fauxlaw
    --> @Sum1hugme
    I exist, therefore, so does God.

    God could have created perfect living organisms from the perspective that they would never die. As it is even now, with imperfection resulting in eventual death, a single human cell containing that species' intended 46 chromosomes [in other words, not a gamete of either sex] pick one at random] has no reason why it should die. It is a nearly perfect organism which, capable of being fed proper ingredients aligned to its best condition of survival, has no biological reason to die, yet it does. It does only because the complete human organism makes poor choices in consumption of food to feed each cell, which can cause breakdown of that cell - mutation - thus rendering death. 

    The idea that God is omnipotent is incorrectly construed that he MUST act omnipotently. That s, in this case, create all tings to be as perfect and immortal as they will ever be. In fact, however, the state of our creation is that, while currently mortal, and, therefore, we will all die, eventually, the design is prepared such that there is means for us to resurrect from death as a perfect, immortal being that will never die again. All living things were created as spirits, first, and then became physical, but mortal beings by birth. Read Genesis very, very carefully, word by word, verse by verse. Stop and ponder what you read. You read of two creation events. Though not clearly, by the words, tod that the first is spiritual, and the second physical, that is what you're reading. There are two separate creative events. That is clear.

    I contend that the "spirit" - and all things have them - is a construct of organized energy ["created" from chaos to organized]; that is, according to Clausius [the first law of thermodynamics] eternal; it cannot be created from nothing. Einstein's E = MC^2 reinforces the principle. The physical body is organized matter, the second "element" [besides energy] of the universe. That is also eternal, but is made from chaotic form to organized form. Therefore, two creative events, spiritual, and physical.

    Thus, we are created as mortal beings of spirit and physical matter first, then die [the physical body and spirit body separate], then are resurrected [a re-unified, perfect spirit and physical body] never to be separated again. This is the same  form God now has - a perfect spirit-and-physcial united body. So, even though we are first created as morta beings that will die, the design is perfect and is ultimately perfected in reality.

    That consequence is not accidental, therefore it is intelligent design, and God exists even as we do, and we will become, eventually, like him. 

    Therefore, my simple answer is: I exist, therefore, so does God.
  • fauxlaw
    fauxlaw avatar
    Debates: 54
    Forum posts: 2,062
    4
    6
    10
    fauxlaw avatar
    fauxlaw
    --> @ludofl3x
    You did not anticipate my #7, did you? It's not exactly biblical, though it does have inference from it.
  • Sum1hugme
    Sum1hugme avatar
    Debates: 14
    Forum posts: 493
    2
    3
    8
    Sum1hugme avatar
    Sum1hugme
    --> @fauxlaw
    This is interesting. It seems like you assume God, and reason from there though.

      You mentioned that the spirit is organized energy. One problem with this is that the concepts of "organized" and "disorganized" are arbitrary. Suppose I throw a rock at a sheet of glass, and the pieces land exactly the way I want them to, I would consider that the most organized result possible. Since E=mc^2 means that matter than energy are interchangeable how do you differentiate the spirit from the body? 

      Finally, maybe I missed it, but you didn't justify the assertion that the consequences are not accidental. So if you could please clarify, I would appreciate it.
  • Deb-8-a-bull
    Deb-8-a-bull avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 1,098
    2
    2
    3
    Deb-8-a-bull avatar
    Deb-8-a-bull
    I've seen a burning bush.  

  • fauxlaw
    fauxlaw avatar
    Debates: 54
    Forum posts: 2,062
    4
    6
    10
    fauxlaw avatar
    fauxlaw
    --> @Sum1hugme
    how do you differentiate the spirit from the body? 
    The same way energy differs from matter. They do have different properties, but both are eternal, but exist as either organized [created] or disorganized [chaos].

    And just so you understand my view of the separation between divine [God] and ordinary human [you and me, and all of us], it is simply that if you throw a rock at a sheet of glass, and it shatters into pieces exactly as you have previously designed, then you are further on the path of perfection [and approaching divinity] than your were before [yesterday, last week, month, year, decade, etc], except that unless there is a recognized pattern to your distribution of pieces of glass, then your design is random and not purposed. A better understanding of organized [created] as opposed to disorganized [chaos] might be to take a collection of shattered glass shards, toss them, and have them arrange as a complete, one piece sheet of organized dimension without a piece out of place, and even visually apparent as a single piece of glass and not a correctly arranged puzzle of separate pieces.
  • fauxlaw
    fauxlaw avatar
    Debates: 54
    Forum posts: 2,062
    4
    6
    10
    fauxlaw avatar
    fauxlaw
    --> @Sum1hugme
    It seems like you assume God
    That's not the flow of my logic. I assume me [with some valid evidence applied], and conclude God [concluded by the same evidence].
  • fauxlaw
    fauxlaw avatar
    Debates: 54
    Forum posts: 2,062
    4
    6
    10
    fauxlaw avatar
    fauxlaw
    --> @Deb-8-a-bull
    Me, too, but it did not speak to me. You?
  • fauxlaw
    fauxlaw avatar
    Debates: 54
    Forum posts: 2,062
    4
    6
    10
    fauxlaw avatar
    fauxlaw
    --> @Sum1hugme
    you didn't justify the assertion that the consequences are not accidental.
    Third to last paragraph of my #7:

    "So, even though we are first created as mortal beings that will die, the design is perfect and is ultimately perfected in reality."

    It's admittedly a future justification; however, there is precedent. Several, actually: Jesus, appearing transfigured, along with Moses and Elias [Elijah], to Peter, James, and John [Matthew 17: 1 -8], but also, Book of Mormon, Ether 3: 1 - 17, and Pearl of Great Price, Joseph Smith - History 1: 11 - 17.
  • Deb-8-a-bull
    Deb-8-a-bull avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 1,098
    2
    2
    3
    Deb-8-a-bull avatar
    Deb-8-a-bull
    --> @fauxlaw
    Negative.  

    It's not going to count is it ?

    I'd like to know the numbers of non god burning bushes as compared to god.
    Let's say you've seen 1000 burning bushes, the chances of one of them being god issssssss well,  EVEN.
    One of them would have to of been him.  
    I guess People don't walk up to  burning bushes these days. 




    The sun has been worshipped by many for many a melenium. 
    Ha . 
    Try saying that three times faux. Many a melenium. 
    Anyway. 
    The sun is a God.
    Andddddddd
    The sun exist. 
    Thus,,,,,,,,,,,,,,  God exists.  
      


     
  • Tradesecret
    Tradesecret avatar
    Debates: 1
    Forum posts: 1,488
    3
    2
    6
    Tradesecret avatar
    Tradesecret
    --> @Stephen
    Yeah, well I'm hoping there'll be one I haven't heard.

     Well you'd have thought after thousands of years that all bases would have been covered.
    And I suppose there was a time when they had them covered. When it was for the church  much more simpler  in past times of illiteracy, ignorance and fear, when priests faced less doubt and no opposition to the total control  they had of a persons daily life and a much tighter grip of the human conscience and  when the churchmen were able to steal vulnerable widows houses, but alas there are legal experts that have taken over that roll today. 
    Christian churchmen cannot burn anyone at the stake any longer. There are no ducking stools for accusations made against mainly women of witchcraft and sorcery,  And no rejoicing  and "happiness"   for " the one who seizes your infants and dashes them against the rocks". Psalm 137:9  The good ole' days eh,  they mush be sorely missed.

    But whatever these excuses are today, they will all boil down to the  preselected option adopted in the days of old mentioned at post #2 above. 
    Perfect example of non-engagement with OP. Negativity. Then attack on the church. Ridicule. Slam bang, thank you maam. 

    ABSOLUTELY - no engagement whatsoever. 





  • Tradesecret
    Tradesecret avatar
    Debates: 1
    Forum posts: 1,488
    3
    2
    6
    Tradesecret avatar
    Tradesecret
    --> @Sum1hugme
    What's your best argument for God's existence?
    I think Fauxlaw's response was interesting and potentially the best.  

    Miracles may or may not be an argument for the existence of God. 

    I cannot actually think of a best argument. I think most arguments for God's existence are good - but the fact is if you don't want to be convinced - you won't be. 

    I said on a similar topic a while ago - that I take the view that the philosophical argument is my favorite.  Not necessarily a good one or the best - but it is my favourite. 

    It is the agnostic.  An agnostic is "a person who believes that nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God."  I think this beautiful statement is a perfect definition of self-contradiction.  In other words, it philosophically proves God exists. It does not prove who God is or what his or her name is - but it is brilliant. 

    I also think that the existence of evil is one of the best arguments for the existence of God. Without God, there is no evil or understanding of evil. 
  • fauxlaw
    fauxlaw avatar
    Debates: 54
    Forum posts: 2,062
    4
    6
    10
    fauxlaw avatar
    fauxlaw
    --> @Deb-8-a-bull
    melenium. 
    Try spelling that. Saying it isn't sufficient, I don't care how many repeats you give it. Millennium.

    have to of
    You're kidding, right? Try sticking to alpha ciphers. Adding numbers has addled the brain. That's "had to have." Come on, man, but not even that is correct; it's passive voice. Stay in the present.
  • fauxlaw
    fauxlaw avatar
    Debates: 54
    Forum posts: 2,062
    4
    6
    10
    fauxlaw avatar
    fauxlaw
    --> @Tradesecret
    Thank you.

    Miracles are distinctly evidence of God because miracles follow expressed faith; they do not cause it. Witness the number of people [5,000 is the count, but not including women and children] fed on two fish and five loaves, who ate to their fill and there were leftovers filling 12 baskets. Yet, filled for their bellies' sake, they were held in their sanhedrin hold and had no room for eternity. "This is an hard word" they said of the following sermon on the bread of life, "who can hear it?" Most walked away, unimpressed by the miracle, though they, themselves, participate in it. Probably did not even bother to offer gratitude for a free meal.

    I like your mention of evil. Yes, there must be opposition in all things.
  • Tradesecret
    Tradesecret avatar
    Debates: 1
    Forum posts: 1,488
    3
    2
    6
    Tradesecret avatar
    Tradesecret
    --> @fauxlaw
    Miracles can also be produced by demons and evil spirits.  It is possible even if implausible that a universe might exist with demons and angels but not God. 

    Think of the little girl in acts who was predicting the future and the book of Revelation which indicates that the beast was able to produce miracles. 
  • fauxlaw
    fauxlaw avatar
    Debates: 54
    Forum posts: 2,062
    4
    6
    10
    fauxlaw avatar
    fauxlaw
    --> @Tradesecret
    That is true, by appearance, but, they are counterfeit's, not true miracles. Just sleight-of-hand. We need faith and proximity to the Holy Spirit to perceive the difference.
  • Tradesecret
    Tradesecret avatar
    Debates: 1
    Forum posts: 1,488
    3
    2
    6
    Tradesecret avatar
    Tradesecret
    --> @fauxlaw
    Still enough to deceive and therefore not be a true witness of God's existence. 
  • Lit
    Lit avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 42
    0
    1
    4
    Lit avatar
    Lit
    --> @Sum1hugme
    I think the fact that no type of person has appeared to decline the thought of God's existence by personal experience to be remarkable. Atheism with all of its rationale for disbelief in the existence of God is eliminated, on the whole, by the existence of former atheists. Individually it isn't eliminated because people wrestle with the idea differently, and I'd say there needs to be some degree of personal venture, if nothing else, for it to feel credible and authentic. But on the whole, there isn't a question that hasn't gone answered unsatisfied to at least one person.

    On the idea of morals crediting God's existence, is it inevitable for a person to think this if they hold to objective morality, and for an atheistic person to hold to moral relativity and subjective morals? If this is the case, the bible saying that these people are fools (morally deficient) becomes a lot more real.

    I think we can be confident to say God interacts with the world by looking at the Jews. There is this story of this king asking a priest, "What's the best evidence for the existence of God?" The priest replied, "Your majesty, the Jews."

    The Jews are unique as far as their relationship and contributions to the world and history, all while being considered history's longest hatred. Jews make up approximately 0.02% of the world's population and have won 20% of nobel peace prizes. Here is something written by a wellknown agnostic, Concerning the Jews:

    If the statistics are right, the Jews constitute but one percent of the human race. It suggests a nebulous dim puff of stardust lost in the blaze of the Milky Way. Properly the Jew ought hardly to be heard of, but he is heard of, has always been heard of. He is as prominent on the planet as any other people and his commercial importance is extravagantly out of proportion to the smallness of his bulk. His contributions to the world's list of great names in literature, science, art, music, finance, medicine, and obtuse learning are also way out of proportion to the weakness of his numbers.
    He has made a marvelous fight in this world in all the ages and has done it with his hands tied behind him.
    He could be vain of himself and be excused for it. The Egyptians, the Babylonians and the Persians rose, filled the planet with sound and splendor, and faded to dream stuff and passed away. The Greeks and the Romans followed and made a vast noise and they are gone. Other peoples have sprung up and held their torch high for a time. But it burned out, and they sit in twilight now or have vanished. The Jew saw them all. Beat them all, and is now what he always was, exhibiting no decadence, no infirmities of age, no weakening of his parts, no slowing of his energies, no dulling of his alert and aggressive mind. All things are mortal but the Jew. All other forces pass, but he remains.

    Their relationship with the land of Israel is almost eternal like. 1,878 years later and one would have thought the Jews should give up praying to return to their land, but this only proved the efficacy of persistent prayer.

    Jesus was a Jew and his contributions to things spiritual have outstood and outshone those before and after him. The Hindus consider Jesus one the most holy of men and Islam doesn't discount Jesus' messiahship.
  • Deb-8-a-bull
    Deb-8-a-bull avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 1,098
    2
    2
    3
    Deb-8-a-bull avatar
    Deb-8-a-bull
    --> @fauxlaw
    Rachel  13  :  22. 
    Sorry about that big fella. 

    Here is what I'll do. 
    To make it easier for you , if I'm ever to chat with you ,  I will simply start with.
    ( A NAME )  followed by some ( Numbers )  

    Like this faux. 
    What's is  ( A Melenium )  ?  Not sure. 

    Well what about this word. 

    Eric 16 : 32. 
    A Melenium. 

    That's better isn't it ?
    Nice.


    Good game. 
    Good game. 
  • zedvictor4
    zedvictor4 avatar
    Debates: 15
    Forum posts: 3,712
    3
    3
    3
    zedvictor4 avatar
    zedvictor4
    --> @Sum1hugme
    The best argument for a GOD principle is purpose.

    Though the Christian and other popular GOD concepts are too naive to be convincing.