I think I've heard every theist argument.

[ImaginalDisc]

What about "Arguement from moral touchstone," or whatever it is called: The assertion that if god doesn't exist, we'd all become murderous barbarians.

 

[KingMerv00]

I really don't know. There have been man madmen through history who have tried to esteem themselves as God.

How do you know? Probably through faith.

We don't believe them because they lack evidence.

 

[Azure]

That doesn't answer my question though. On what basis do you reject an infinite number of alternative supernatural beliefs? What about faith-based contradictory statments?

If I believe in God...how can I reject Xenu? Again, through faith.

I know this sounds repetitive...

This isn't always true.

Give me an example for a closed-mind is a good thing.

I started this thread in hopes of hearing more arguments for the existance of God. It made me sad that the debate was so easily finished. I absolutely love when my beliefs are challenged...it helps me to get closer to the truth.

I am ready to believe in God. I just need a reason.

I don't think you'll ever find a reason to believe in God, because the reason you're looking for 'cold, hard proof' does not exist.

 

[KingMerv00]

What about "Arguement from moral touchstone," or whatever it is called: The assertion that if god doesn't exist, we'd all become murderous barbarians.

Covered in my OP. See? No new arguments left.

 

[Azure]

What about "Arguement from moral touchstone," or whatever it is called: The assertion that if god doesn't exist, we'd all become murderous barbarians.

There are people who believe in God who are murderous barbarians...and people who don't believe in God who are murderous barbarians.

Subjective claim.

 

[KingMerv00]

If I believe in God...how can I reject Xenu? Again, through faith.

I know this sounds repetitive...

I can believe whatever I like through faith and be justified?

What about contradictions?

Give me an example for a closed-mind is a good thing.

I think you misunderstood. I meant that people who are open minded aren't always enlightened.

I don't think you'll ever find a reason to believe in God, because the reason you're looking for 'cold, hard proof' does not exist.

You believe in God. I do not. We contradict each other. One of us must be right. Now what should we do?

Please don't say "faith". It is a word that can justify anything.

 

[Azure]

Well, then you have a much narrower definition of theism than most people.

Expand that definition to anyone who believes in a supernatural being.

Except that they would still not be in a position to dismiss anybody else's claim without exposing their own claims (such as they may be) to the same dismissal.

Sure. Which is why I can't truthfully say that Scientology is a false belief.

I believe it is...but by no means can I prove it.

 

[KingMerv00]

Sure. Which is why I can't truthfully say that Scientology is a false belief.

I believe it is...but by no means can I prove it.

You don't need to prove Scientology is false. They need to prove it is true.

I don't see why their faith isn't enough.

 

[Azure]

I can believe whatever I like through faith and be justified?

What about contradictions?

Give me an example.

I'm trying to remember an incident in the 70's...where someone coerced a lot of people into killing themselves for religious reasons. Anyone remember that?

The outcome there would probably be a contradiction to their belief. I can't really remember the specific details though.

I think you misunderstood. I meant that people who are open minded aren't always enlightened.

No, I'm just being a prick.

You believe in God. I do not. We contradict each other. One of us must be right. Now what should we do?

Beat each other up?

What CAN we do?

Please don't say "faith". It is a word that can justify anything.[/QUOTE]

I know. It is also the only thing that will justify a belief in God.

 

[Azure]

You don't need to prove Scientology is false. They need to prove it is true.

We were talking about dismissing other beliefs.

They need to prove it is true in order to attract people to their belief system. Obviously they're doing something right.

I don't see why their faith isn't enough.

It can be, yes.

 

[Jon.]

Expand that definition to anyone who believes in a supernatural being.

Okay, as long as you also remove the qualifier about not being religious. The Pope is a theist.

Sure. Which is why I can't truthfully say that Scientology is a false belief.

I believe it is...but by no means can I prove it.

Okay, so why do you choose your faith (whatever it is) over others?

 

[Jon.]

I try my best to see all sides of an argument. I've listened to those who believe in God for years now and I have begun to get frustrated. I find it very difficult to listen to theists because the same dozen or so arguments for God repeat themselves regularly and each one is crushed by simple logic. Have I really reached the end of my religious self-examination at the age of 26? Has anyone seen any new approaches to the God question I might not have heard? I'm desparate for an challenge.

Here is a list of aguments that pop into my head:

Fideism
God-of-the-Gaps
Holy Books as evidence
Argument for morality
Pascal's Wager
Fine-Tuner
Various "word game" proofs of God
Personal revelation
First Cause

Help! My brain needs philosophical excercise!

I can think of two others.

Credo consolans. I believe because it consoles me, or makes me feel better, although I know there is no evidence or rational reason to believe in the truth of my beliefs.. There is no real refutation for this, except to say that the person does not really believe, they just act as if they do.

Argument from inertia. My family/our people have "always" believed this, so I do too. IMO, this is at the root of the beliefs of a very large segment of the theistic community. It has, of course, no validity and does not really need to be refuted beyond pointing out other things that people "always" believed (the earth is flat, blacks are inferior and ought to be slaves, the Osmonds are good entertainment) that turned out to be false (or at least rejected).

 

[Azure]

Okay, as long as you also remove the qualifier about not being religious. The Pope is a theist.

So you assume anyone who believes in the supernatural, or spiritual word is automatically religious?

Okay, so why do you choose your faith (whatever it is) over others?

Probably because of my childhood.

 

[KingMerv00]

Give me an example.

I'm trying to remember an incident in the 70's...where someone coerced a lot of people into killing themselves for religious reasons. Anyone remember that?

Another misunderstanding. If faith is a valid way of objective truth, why do different faiths contradict? Do you just believe and hope you picked the right one?

Beat each other up?

That would violate my "no losing teeth rule".

What CAN we do?

Carefully look at reality and make a rational decision?

I know. It is also the only thing that will justify a belief in God.

I think your use of the word "justify" is wrong.

 

[Jon.]

So you assume anyone who believes in the supernatural, or spiritual word is automatically religious?

Not at all. I accept that there is a difference between "spiritual" and "religious." The precise difference varies from person to person and argument to argument, but it generally revolves around the involvement or non-involvement of the structures of organized religion. However, I was pointing out that most people who are "religious" are also theists. It appeared that you wanted to restrict the term "theist" to those who are "spiritual" but not "religious."

Probably because of my childhood.

I applaud you for your candour. Does it not concern you that, if you had had a different childhood you might have a very different faith?

 

[KingMerv00]

So
Probably because of my childhood.

What about your childhood?

 

[Azure]

Another misunderstanding. If faith is a valid way of objective truth, why do different faiths contradict? Do you just believe and hope you picked the right one?

I have faith that my belief in God is correct.

I never said I was religious.

That would violate my "no losing teeth rule".

I was so looking forward too it.

Carefully look at reality and make a rational decision?

Absolutely.

I think your use of the word "justify" is wrong.

How would you describe it?

I don't know how else to explain how one could 'justify' their belief in God.

 

[Azure]

Not at all. I accept that there is a difference between "spiritual" and "religious." The precise difference varies from person to person and argument to argument, but it generally revolves around the involvement or non-involvement of the structures of organized religion. However, I was pointing out that most people who are "religious" are also theists. It appeared that you wanted to restrict the term "theist" to those who are "spiritual" but not "religious."

No, no restrictions here.

I didn't want to make it seem that way.

Fair enough though.

I applaud you for your candour. Does it not concern you that, if you had had a different childhood you might have a very different faith?

Its not a concern, really....because I am not religious, at this point.

I only believe in a supernatural being.

 

[Azure]

What about your childhood?

I was brought up with the belief that there is something greater than ourselves out there.

Not religious though....my parents haven't ever imposed their religion on me...I have yet to come full circle on that.

 

[KingMerv00]

You believe in a supernatural being. Fine. I don't care whether that belief is "spiritual" or "religious". It is still based on nothing.

You don't have any solid rules about this being. Why does that mean you are free to believe without reason?