Discussion Can anyone offer an argument for the existence of god which might actually be convincing to a nonbeliever?

[Darkover]

Can anyone offer an argument for the existence of god which might actually be convincing to a nonbeliever?

I've been around a lot of religious people in my life, but never anyone who had arrived at their religious beliefs through a serious consideration the idea. For most people religion is just an identity. They were born into a family who practice a particular faith so they adopted that faith and derive a sense of community and meaning from it.

When I was younger I rebelled against that hegemonic blind faith and vague sense of tradition most American Christianity seems to offer and became atheist.
I think I now am more willing to entertain some of the ideas of religion than I was at my most atheist but I still don't see how someone living in the modern world could honestly think about some of these things for more than a moment and still believe in god. The problem of evil, the problem of eternity, the historicity of religious texts, and countless other things are all against the major religions which billions of people still follow.

Most of the arguments I see are in one of two categories:

Faith: which seems to me like mostly just an admission that you don't have an argument. Somehow its supposed to make sense for me to believe in something not only in spite of, but because there's no reason or evidence?

Believing in god will make you happy or will make you a better person: This is not an argument for the existence of god. Its an argument for the institution of religion.

I'm trying to approach this idea in good faith but I'm just baffled by how many people still believe in god.

 

[WAITING TO DIE]

Nope.
I can't think of anything that would convince a non - believer to believe in some bearded asshole in the sky god.
Nope, nothing whatsoever.

 

[CrazyDiamond04]

I think that one of the most convincing arguments in favor of god that I've seen (I'm an atheist) is St Thomas Aquinas' cosmological argument. The argument basically follows that everything in the universe is caused by something else, and everything that is in motion was caused to move by something else. Because of this, there has to have been an origin point from which all other things were caused, and that this thing can't have caused itself into existence, it exists outside of our plane of reality and that thing would be God.

 

[Darkover]

I think that one of the most convincing arguments in favor of god that I've seen (I'm an atheist) is St Thomas Aquinas' cosmological argument. The argument basically follows that everything in the universe is caused by something else, and everything that is in motion was caused to move by something else. Because of this, there has to have been an origin point from which all other things were caused, and that this thing can't have caused itself into existence, it exists outside of our plane of reality and that thing would be God.

No one has given any reason to think that the First Cause is all-powerful, all-knowing, all-good, etc, also motion is relative

 

[Life_and_Death]

im curious the purpose of this thread considering you said

anyone who claims to talk to demons angels ghost vampires werewolves gods tooth fairy santa claus ect are suffering from a mental illness period

although granted there is a difference between believing the existence of and talking to. your heavy stance stating "they suffer from a mental illness period" kinda makes it feel like this thread was created specifically for the purpose of "bashing" others (purposefully disbelieving with no care to actually think about the responses youre being given)

 

[empty sighs]

I think that one of the most convincing arguments in favor of god that I've seen (I'm an atheist) is St Thomas Aquinas' cosmological argument. The argument basically follows that everything in the universe is caused by something else, and everything that is in motion was caused to move by something else. Because of this, there has to have been an origin point from which all other things were caused, and that this thing can't have caused itself into existence, it exists outside of our plane of reality and that thing would be God.

Technically this could be true, but I think the hypothesis is less convincing than the Zero Energy Universe hypothesis even if you believe nothing was before the Big Bang. Though there are many theories speculating a cycle of events. It's interesting to think about though. Still, you'd have to think of something that presupposes that God by the same logic.

To add on (in relation to the original post) I can think of arguments which create a possibility for God to exist that isn't totally outlandish, but I can't think of any real evidence that would prove it more likely than not. For this reason, there are so many atheists and no one religion can prove itself correct as far as I know. We would know if there was any real evidence.

 

[tiger b]

I think that convincing anyone of anything is usually a complete waste of time. Things are the way they are beyond any opinion, agreement or disagreement.

I come from a background of atheism in a wider context of toxic religious bigotry, yet I was open-minded on faith. I put a lot of thought and meditation into various questions, for a very long time. I got an answer - a very simple one - that didn't suit my beliefs, yet an answer I couldn't ignore because it was convenient to do so. It's definitely not a question of identity or fitting in. I'd rather be an atheist but I personally know that would be a lie - albeit closer to the truth than a 'conventional' Christian.

A man in the sky with a beard is clearly idiotic. A hell and a heaven is a concept, not a reality. Judgement from a cruel father figure and most of the teachings of the Bible can be seen for what they are with just a little historical study. A Christian is simply someone who believes in Christ and God, and Jesus himself advocates simple faith. What could everything else be but a distortion?

I'm not sure I could ever answer the op to the satisfaction required. I'm not sure it matters. I'd just say that, in my opinion, whoever asks questions will get answers eventually. It comes down to the questions asked and being able and willing to listen to an answer.

Most - no, the vast majority - of people will only hear what they want to hear - and I mostly include myself in that, even now. Otherwise, ironically, we wouldn't be here in the first place - we wouldn't need to be.