Let's have some fun. Play god's advocate. I thought this would be easier. Arguing for god is not easy, especially if you don't use the holy books. My best shot.
(A) I just feel god, in my heart.
I went like this for years until I admitted to myself that I was talking to myself. I was probably a result of childhood indoctrination. It' a weak argument.
(B) There has to be eternal "justice"; what is the point of being a good person. Why not just be a thief and do what ever you want to make yourself happy?
This is the best argument for god, I think. What "goes around-comes around" here on earth, but not always. Granted, it is just wishful thinking that fairness is somehow owed to us.
(C) Something had to create all this
I went with this for a while. Then I figured out that it is "small thinking" and an imposition of our limited life experience.
That's all I got. Take away the divinity of the holy books and its a hard sell. What is your best argument for the existence of god?
Wow Korsan. I think you covered it.
So this just popped across my Youtube feed.
11. After an argument is determined to be groundless, continuing to try to find grounds is not always fruitful. Ad Nauseam, or 'making sense out of non-sense'.
correlaries a) Digging deeper into authorities. Ad Dickium.
b) Asserting that evidence is lost or not available,
but assertion is true, because. Ad Copout-ium
c) Assertion is based upon word salud, speeking in tounges, etc.
I feel like we've lost the big picture again, getting into minutia. The thread's about "best arguments FOR a god". I like like speculating and discussing possibilities, but it's plain absurd to make absolute or tenacious arguments for or against something that cannot yet be proven either way. I believe (but not absolutely) that we'll never be able prove or disprove God, orbiting teapots, unicorns, or even Santa Clause.
So what does that leave us with? We either keep discussing and discovering what we can, or we fall back on some kind of fill-in-the-gaps explanation. In science, fill-in-the-gaps can help us visualize a better model to test, but still, the point is that it must always be questioned. Science's goal is not to claim ultimate knowledge, but to just keep learning more and more about the universe and ourselves. I don't even care if Hawkings says there's no God... it's totally irrelevant to the task at hand, which is to keep testing and finding the reproducible, predictable results.
Let people fill in the gaps with God, I really don't care. Let them believe in unicorns, if they like, as long as they don't force us to worship unicorns, and as long as they're not teaching my kids that unicorns must be the answer because science hasn't explained it well enough, yet. What really bothers me is when they presume to know anything about what God is or wants, and they try to push that certainty on others. That's the only reason I'm here... because of forcefully imposed religion, to the point where it becomes anti-reason, anti-skeptical, and anti-science.
I meant to add... Angelo gave his best arguments. I think he's determine to fill in the gaps with God and bible, no matter how well science has historically filled the gaps, and no matter how well science will continue to fill in the gaps. It's clear that further reasoning will be useless, so can't we just let his god-did-its stand or fall on their own? Let the future show who can predict it the best, instead of continuously, uselessly banging heads against walls.
"unicorns must be the answer because science hasn't explained it well enough, yet."
And when science does, they move the goalposts - once they disavowed the BB, but with its wide acceptance, now they're buying it, but claiming god did it!
All you Think Atheist folk, why in the pluperfect hell are you answering a\Angelo!
That's what I said last year, Tom, but they paid no more attention then, than they're doing now - he's been gone since yesterday, and they're STILL commenting to him! It boggles the mind!
Comments are not really for him but the trolls that will follow.
I just want to hijack this thread long enough to wish everyone a Happy Columbus Day!
I quess I would have to say that I know nothing of 'god'. Trying to say something about 'god', puts me in a similar position to needing to describe the dark side of the moon, or the inside of my head!
Over the last few months I have been trying to find an honest way to deal with two local churches, one to help with local humanitarian causes, the other to help with their neighborhood garden.
Recently I volunteered to help the local Lutherian church with their Steward Ship program. We had our first meeting last Friday where it was made clear that I must both formally 'join' the church by first having a, for me, a very long talk with the minister, then on the 17th of November take part in the 'new members' ritual. I am sheduled to give my 10mins talk on Environmental Stewardship, which I can do rather easily, but using any reference to 'god' leaves me in a rather big pickle concerning personal honesty. I was thinking of using Sagan's 'Blue Dot' video, or building a short power point presentation that would scare the be-jesus out of the audience, and cause my tar and feathering, with an optional railing(sadly my girl friend might also has more than second thoughts about our relationship)! The last time I did anything like this the Seventh Day Adventists tried character 'ass-ination', when I challenged their crazy position on evolution and the theory about the flood.
For the Presbyterians, they have a rather nice, but under attended garden in a nice place next to a retirement home. I am on good speeking terms with the young minister, and have attended their men's group to discuse the garden, I thought. So far little actual 'garden' conversation, but we have been discussing the book 'The Prodigal God', by Timothy Keller. Sadly I did a background check on Mr. Keller and found a rather ugly history concerning gay rights and maybe a questionalbe environmental concern. After our last men's group, the minister was rather but aback by my intial position on the thesis, it appears that any further 'philosophical talk' would be at a local tavern and off church grounds.
I am testing the hypothesis that an atheist can make a relationship with a theist work, as long as we both share similar common concerns, and honor each others foibles/hangups.
Cof course I might be nuts/loney/etc.....