Arguments for the existence of god

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
 
Line 1: Line 1:
[[Image:Button_commonobjections.png|right|Common objections to atheism and counter-apologetics]]
+
[[Image:Button_argumentsfor.png|right|Arguments for the existence of god]]
 
+
 
==Overview==
 
==Overview==
==Categories==
 
With the growing rise of ''"new atheism"'', non believers have seen an increasing hostility from theist. Common criticisms of atheism and counter-apologetics arguments are made to support the theists position. These usually fall into one of three categories.
 
  
===Appeals to emotion===
+
===Apologetics===
Since the removal of mandatory prayer in American schools, atheism has bee the focus of an increased political and media reaction in the form of fear and smear campaigns. These appeals to emotion have been coming increasing from the politicians such as Monique Davis who stated that "it is dangerous for our children to even know that your philosophy exists"
+
As long as there has been two or more people with differing religious views, there as been proselytism. This of course presents a problem, as religion is based on faith rather than evidence, logic or reason, how does one go about convincing other people that their religion is the correct one? After all, if its based on faith and not reason, your faith is by definition really a no more reasonable position than anyone else's. If you don't like what the church is doing, just form your own. You don't need evidence, just faith. ie. make it up as you go along. As a result of this complete lack of evidence on what the ''true'' faith apparently is, there are over 1000 denominations of Christianity alone, and no empirical reason to believe any of them.  
* [[Why are you trying to tear down others faith?]]
+
 
* [[Why can't everyone just have their beliefs?]]
+
Over the years, trying to convert people to a particular faith has taken many different forms. Most of them resulting in brute force and threats of violence. "convert or suffer he wrath of gods chosen people" This was fine up until about the end of the dark ages, with the addage that-
* [[Why do atheists inspire such hatred?]]
+
 
* [[What about all the good things religion has given us?]]
+
''unknown source'':
* [[Hitler was an atheist]]
+
{{Quote|Creationism lost its best argument when the catholic church stopped burning people at the stake}}
 +
 
 +
After the enlightenment, the church started to have serious problems justifying their position. As science expanded our view of the world, God had less and less places to hide. Coupled with the fact that it was now considered slightly ''uncouth'' to simply torture and burn alive those that dissagreed with you, the church and its paritioners now had to work very hard to justify their positions of belief, and harder still to convert others. Thus apologetics was born.
 +
 
 +
In a nutshell, apologetics is the discipline of attempting to justify a theological position through evidence, philosophy, science, metaphysics, and history. However when these apologetics arguments are actually reviewed under scrutiny, we find they rely on:
 +
* evidence so incredibly poor that even the apologists using it wouldn't accept such evidence as proof of anything in any other argument than for that of their personal god,
 +
* horrific straw man representations of true scientific theories
 +
* convoluted metaphysics that ultimately have no real world underpinning
 +
* and the distortion of historically documented events and evidence to the point of holocaust denial.
 +
There are many conflicting arguments attempting to support the existence of many conflicting gods. They can't all be correct, the can however all be wrong. Indeed, '''every''' argument presented for God thus far has one or more problems with validity or soundness.
 +
 
 +
===Definitions===
 +
It is important when engaging in an argument with a theist, that all the required concepts involved in the argument are clearly defined. Particularly the definition of God. Having clearly defined definitions prevents the theist from [[Moving goalposts|moving the goalposts]] mid argument, or even more frustratingly getting to the end of the argument and then having the theists say “but [[thats not my god]]
 +
 
 +
===Purpose of the argument===
 +
It is also important to make sure that the theist is worth arguing with. What is the purpose of the argument?
 +
 
 +
For instance, if you ask the theist to make their best, most persuasive argument, that supports their belief in God. You may then ask, “This being your best argument for belief, if I can prove this argument is logically flawed, does that mean you will concede that god does not exist?”
 +
 
 +
If the theist's flatly responds with “No, I would still believe in God”, you should ask yourself ''is it really worth continuing the exchange''
 +
 
 +
==Favourite arguments==
 +
===Most common theistic arguments===
 +
* [[First cause]]
 +
* [[Pascal's Wager]]
 +
* [[Argument from design]]
  
===Straw men===
+
===Favourites of professional apologists===
Probably the most common argument against atheism and counter-apologetics from the theistic ranks, is straw man depictions of the atheist position. These can range from misrepresentations of evolutions such as leading questions like "if we came from monkeys, how come monkeys are still around today" or assertions that science is as much of a religious faith as Christianity, or misrepresentations about atheism and secular humanism being synonymous with immorality, communism or mass murder.
+
* [[Ontological argument]]
* [[You are a communist]]
+
* [[Transcendental argument]]
* [[So you believe in nothing?]]
+
* [[Kalam]]
* [[You just want to sin]]
+
* [[It takes more faith to disbelieve]]
+
* [[Atheists worship materialism]]
+
* [[Science is a faith]]
+
* [[Atheism is a religion]]
+
* [[Atheism is based on faith]]
+
  
===Appeals to solipsism===
+
{{Arguments for God}}
Perhaps the most interesting of the three categories is the increasing problem of appeals to solipsism. The idea that we can't know everything, (or anything depending on how far the theist wishes to take it) and as such, we can never completely rule god out. Perhaps he's hiding on the other side of Pluto where we just can't see him. This is a classic god of the gaps argument. However this line of argument would seem to create more questions that it solves. If we take the theists assertions to their logical conclusions, ''that we can't know everything or anything'', the how is it that they can claim to know anything about their god? How do they know he exists at all?
+
* [[What are your qualifications?]]
+
* [[God can't be defined]]
+
* [[Science can't touch god]]
+
* [[You can't disprove God]]
+
* [[That might be true for you, but its not true for me]]
+
* [[Religion is another way of knowing]]
+
  
{{Common objections}}
+
[[:Category:Arguments]]
 +
[[:Category:Christian apologists]]
 +
[[:Category:Atheists]]

Revision as of 05:35, 20 December 2009

Arguments for the existence of god

Contents

Overview

Apologetics

As long as there has been two or more people with differing religious views, there as been proselytism. This of course presents a problem, as religion is based on faith rather than evidence, logic or reason, how does one go about convincing other people that their religion is the correct one? After all, if its based on faith and not reason, your faith is by definition really a no more reasonable position than anyone else's. If you don't like what the church is doing, just form your own. You don't need evidence, just faith. ie. make it up as you go along. As a result of this complete lack of evidence on what the true faith apparently is, there are over 1000 denominations of Christianity alone, and no empirical reason to believe any of them.

Over the years, trying to convert people to a particular faith has taken many different forms. Most of them resulting in brute force and threats of violence. "convert or suffer he wrath of gods chosen people" This was fine up until about the end of the dark ages, with the addage that-

unknown source:

"Creationism lost its best argument when the catholic church stopped burning people at the stake"

After the enlightenment, the church started to have serious problems justifying their position. As science expanded our view of the world, God had less and less places to hide. Coupled with the fact that it was now considered slightly uncouth to simply torture and burn alive those that dissagreed with you, the church and its paritioners now had to work very hard to justify their positions of belief, and harder still to convert others. Thus apologetics was born.

In a nutshell, apologetics is the discipline of attempting to justify a theological position through evidence, philosophy, science, metaphysics, and history. However when these apologetics arguments are actually reviewed under scrutiny, we find they rely on:

  • evidence so incredibly poor that even the apologists using it wouldn't accept such evidence as proof of anything in any other argument than for that of their personal god,
  • horrific straw man representations of true scientific theories
  • convoluted metaphysics that ultimately have no real world underpinning
  • and the distortion of historically documented events and evidence to the point of holocaust denial.

There are many conflicting arguments attempting to support the existence of many conflicting gods. They can't all be correct, the can however all be wrong. Indeed, every argument presented for God thus far has one or more problems with validity or soundness.

Definitions

It is important when engaging in an argument with a theist, that all the required concepts involved in the argument are clearly defined. Particularly the definition of God. Having clearly defined definitions prevents the theist from moving the goalposts mid argument, or even more frustratingly getting to the end of the argument and then having the theists say “but thats not my god

Purpose of the argument

It is also important to make sure that the theist is worth arguing with. What is the purpose of the argument?

For instance, if you ask the theist to make their best, most persuasive argument, that supports their belief in God. You may then ask, “This being your best argument for belief, if I can prove this argument is logically flawed, does that mean you will concede that god does not exist?”

If the theist's flatly responds with “No, I would still believe in God”, you should ask yourself is it really worth continuing the exchange

Favourite arguments

Most common theistic arguments

Favourites of professional apologists


v · d Arguments for the existence of god
Anthropic arguments   Anthropic principle · Natural-law argument
Arguments for belief   Pascal's Wager · Argument from faith · Just hit your knees
Christological arguments   Argument from scriptural miracles · Would someone die for a lie? · Liar, Lunatic or Lord
Cosmological arguments   Argument from aesthetic experience · Argument from contingency · Cosmological argument · Fine-tuning argument · Kalam · Leibniz cosmological argument · Principle of sufficient reason · Unmoved mover · Why is there something rather than nothing?
Majority arguments   Argumentum ad populum · Argument from admired religious scientists
Moral arguments   Argument from justice · Divine command theory
Ontological argument   Argument from degree · Argument from goodness · Argument from desire · Argument from the origin of the idea of God
Dogmatic arguments   Argument from divine sense · Sensus divinitatis · Argument from uniqueness
Teleological arguments   Argument from design · Banana argument · 747 Junkyard argument · Laminin argument · Argument from natural disasters
Testimonial arguments   Personal revelation · Argument from observed miracles · Argument from personal experience · Consciousness argument for the existence of God · Emotional pleas
Transcendental arguments   God created numbers
Scriptural arguments   Scriptural inerrancy · Scriptural scientific foreknowledge · Scriptural codes
Category:Arguments

Category:Christian apologists Category:Atheists

Personal tools
Namespaces
Variants
Actions
wiki navigation
IronChariots.Org
Toolbox