Existence of God

It is 2021 and we still have people considered serious thinkers who throw around these terms. In the same way that we have academic people who believe in a god, we don't stop applying the same standards of evidence for their claims.

Nobody has been able to provide any proof of these things, and much like the god debates of the last 10-15 years. We have to meet misinformation with skepticism.

One of the things that is wrong with religion is that it teaches us to be satisfied with answers which are not really answered at all. - Richard Dawkins

This is the same with the nebulous ideas of racism being systemic or white people having a privilege. For fear of backlash, this isn't questioned, we aren't getting good answers, and the concepts carry on unchallenged. This is how bad ideas are allowed to grow and fester in society.

Full disclosure: I am an an atheist. I've just often seen other atheists make claims like "I will believe in God when you provide me with scientific evidence for his existence.", and I want to argue why I think such demands are nonsensical. Now my argument:

Science deals with empirical reality. A scientific question is thus one about an empirical proposition. E.g.: "Green cows exist" is an empirical proposition. And "Do green cows exist?" is a scientific question.

To claim (EDIT: transcendental) God exists, however, is not an empirical proposition. It is a metaphysical one. If God exists, then he does not exists 'somewhere in the world', but outside our empirical realm all together. He would exist in a transcendental realm that we can supposedly only reach when we die and leave the empirical realm. To ask for scientific proof for God thus does not make any sense, because you're asking a scientific question about a metaphysical proposition.

You could then argue that only empirical pr

Hi all,

I recently presented a version of the transcendental argument for the existence of God for a philosophy of religion class that I'm TAing, and I'm curious what you all would make of it. I'm sure many of you have seen some form of this argument before (from people like Matt Slick and Sye Ten Bruggencate), but I the version of it I presented, drawing from this paper by James Anderson and Greg Welty, is particularly strong. Here is my version of the argument, in slideshow form, which I think is stronger than the version presented in that paper, if anyone is interested in taking a look at it and attempting to refute it.

You can look at the linked slideshow for substantiation of the premises, but here's the basic argument:

>P1: Logical laws are necessarily true propositions.

>P2: In order for a proposition to be true, it must exist.

Can someone please show me proof god exists?

According to the bible, nothing is impossible for god (Luke 1:37). Further, god desires for all people to be saved and come to know "the truth", which in the context of the verse presumably means the existence of Jesus, heaven and hell, salvation, etc. (1 Timothy 2:3-4).

And yet, despite the biblical god's supposed power and desires, there are many who do not believe this god exists - in fact, according to the bible itself, far more people will go to "destruction" instead of "life" (Matthew 7:13-14).

Even further, despite the bible's many claims of clearly observable miracles (country-wide plagues, mass resurrection, creation of food ex nihilo, interfering with orbits in our solar system, etc.), nothing of the sort happens today, with any supposed modern "miracles" being vastly reduced in scope and observability, and being of dubious veracity. This is despite the bible's own acknowledgment that such miracles lead people to believe (Acts 9:40-42), which supposedly is what this god wan

What is the best way to counter this common apologist argument?

Someone just replied to me:

"You cannot prove or disprove the existence of god so why bother debating it?"

for the sake of argument let's accept the following as sound:

1. everything that begins to exist has a cause.
2. the universe began to exist
3. therefore the universe has a cause

definitions as I understand them:

God: the abrahamic omni-max deity.

Universe: our current space-time tracing back to the singularity

exist: to impact a mind independent reality

begin to exist: to enter into being through means independent of the subsequent reality (aka not just a reconstitution of things from the reality it now exists in)

The Problem

the conclusion does nothing to limit the infinite number of possible causes (ex-nihilo, other universes, non-causal realities). I've also seen no evidence that modern cosmology refutes the conclusion either (that something started space time). Therefore, there's no point in even stating the argument or similar arguments from contingency as they do nothing to meaningfully point to YHWH that isn't commonly understood already.

Edit: please look through the comments to see if your question was already posed, it would be redundant to pose a questions multiple times. :)

Let me begin by stating that I am a Shi’i Muslim, and the arguments I will lay out come from a Islamic Shi’i point of view. Shi'a theology is different in some ways to Sunni theology, the predominant sect. So don't be surprised if some things come up in the comments about Islam and I don't believe in them. This post is meant to prove the existence of God philosophically, for rational thinkers. Please read thoroughly :)I will not use scientific evidence to prove anything, because in my opinion it doesn’t make sense. When talking in terms of science, you are asking for evidence that comes through in the form of sensation and perception. It must be data, something that can be proved with your 5 senses, for it to be considered scientific. This is not how somebody should go about proving the existence of God, because God is not something that can

I (29M) grew up with my three sisters in downstate New York. Religion was never something pushed on us while we were growing up, but something I think we all had a interest in. My sisters almost all identify as atheist or non-affiliated— I’m kind of in between. Not atheist, but most definitely not religious by any means. I believe in reincarnation to an extent, and that good things happen to good people. I very much believe in karma and have a mutual respect for every living creature on the planet. But I have always had a hard time grasping higher powers and deities in general. What’s a good argument supporting the idea of the existence, or lack thereof?

So I do stochastic modeling for a living and basically that involves taking complicated processes and representing them with mathematical equations. Here’s one that I wrote to evaluate whether or not humans may have been created artificially. Even if you have a very basic understanding of math I don't think anything in here should be too overwhelming for you. If you don't understand a term please keep reading as I explain most concepts in several levels of detail.

Assumptions:

1. Intelligent life develops organically every N years. This is equivalent to saying the development of new life due to randomness can be represented by a Poisson process with constant arrival rate 1 / N.

2. All intelligent life creates other intelligent life artificially every M years. If you want to put some probability on each species deciding to create life it's equivalent to changing M; you're scaling the arrival rate.

3. The total amount of intelligent life in the universe is increasing in time and for

To Muslims: How can you prove God's existence through the Fitra?

In Sunni Salafi Islam, people are said to be born with an innate disposition called the Fitra. I would say it's a specific kind of human nature with a theistic and Islamic twist. The Fitra supposedly guides humans to believe in many things such as there being a creator of everything, which leads to belief in the specific god Allah. Also, it's important to mention that people can be very easily strayed from the Fitra. Having Christian parents might lead their child to believe in a God that is unlike the one Muslims believe in, and so the child raised in a Christian household is probably strayed from their Fitra because of the external cause of the parents' teachings of Christianity. Anyhow, many Muslims say that they can use the Fitra to argue for the existence of God/Allah.

So, I'm wondering about this. How does this make sense without it being circular or nonsensical? I have a few questions about it.

To Muslims: The c

I've been involved in an interesting group-chat exchange recently with a theist.

I sent them this:

"Not knowing how something works is an invitation to discover. Not proof that an invisible deity 'must exist' simply because one couldn't explain something. Science exists on the border between human knowledge and ignorance. It's a tool whose only job is to expand knowledge beyond where it is today. But where that ignorance begins, the solution is not to shoehorn in our favorite ancient answer (ie God..) just because we can't stand to not know. The solution is to admit that we don't know, and then get to work."

To which they replied:

"Your position on this is just an opinion. You are presenting your opinion as truth which it transparently isn’t. There are a billion things science hasn’t discovered. There are also limits to what science can discover because human beings don’t and never will have the ability to properly understand. I’m not saying that’s proof god exists. I’m not saying

Assalamualaikum, everyone. I came across this argument on Quora proving the existence of God via the laws of physics. I cannot remember what exactly it was but here is roughly what I remember:

"By Newton's First Law, energy can neither be created nor destroyed. During the creation of the Universe, it was as though there was a large explosion of energy. However, since energy cannot be created, the only logical answer is that there was an entity possessing said energy which caused the creation of the Universe".

I would like to ask what your opinion's are regarding the use of this argument, the possible counter-arguments that would be presented and how to strengthen this argument.

I hope that by using this argument, we would be able to convince atheists of the existence of God and hence help them head in the right direction regarding religion.

EDIT: Thank you everyone for your answers.

Part if the above quote is like a Genghis Khan quote.

Preliminary sources / links:

• https://twitter.com/MyLegacyKit/status/1352960746154557441
• https://twitter.com/cryptorebel_SV/status/1352773793639522304
• https://www.reddit.com/r/bitcoincashSV/comments/l310nw/i_am_the_punishment_of_god_in_cryptocurrency_if/
• https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/l3xu93/faketoshi_has_now_completely_lost_it_and/

The problem of evil is a topic that has vexed theologians for thousands of years. They have come up with all sorts of elaborate "solutions" to try to make sense of why a loving God would allow (or even direct) evil. Rather than looking at something abstract like evil in general, I find it is helpful to focus on specific examples.

What I want to look at here are personality disorders. First, there is the question of whether mental illness can even be categorised as "evil" or if it is a whole other category. Second, there is great variety in the effects of the personality disorders. Some are negative for the individual but not so much for others, for example obsessive compulsive disorder. Other illnesses, like antisocial personality disorder, often have major negative impacts for those unfortunate enough to become victims of the sufferer.

I want to open this topic up for discussion with a few questions: Why do personality disorders exist? Are they purely a medical condition or is Sata

While watching a video by EXURB1A, he says that challenges of pre-historic, historic humans centered around not to die from diseases, lions, natural disasters etc , 21st century humans have different problem Why to live or How to live??. I think it a common problem around the world. That is why self-help books and programmes are so popular. Sadhguru(even ISKCON) branding himself as self-help author is not a coincidence, and also there patreons are not illiterate, but relatively stable in life, having a good job, or business what so ever.

You see Science and technology has a fundamental problem (atleast to humans) that it is not human centric, but religion is. The idea that you(a guy on moist speck) are not a significant to universe kind of freaks people out. So Why to live?? science may not have answer, but religion says it is all a big plan of some sky-daddy, so don't think about it enjoy the mystery . How to live ?? sky-daddy wrote a book just read it.

You see ethics is most dif

https://www.42rulesforlife.com/a-brief-proof-for-the-existence-of-god/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYdwdu3J5CA

Science point:

The following article in the "science magazine" https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2013/02/shhh-ants-are-talking discusses how scientists in the 21st century discovered, through the use of specialized sound tools, that ants actually speak to each other by rubbing together specific sections of their abdomens to create very low-pitched sounds. These sounds cannot be heard by human ears nor by regular microphones. This is different from their other ability to produce chemical pheromones to guide other ants in the colony for locations of food, shelter etc.

Background to the premise:

Almost 1450 years ago, God revealed to Muhammed (Peace Be Upon Him) the story of King Solomon (PBUH) who lived between 970 to 931 BCE in Jerusalem, and who was taught the language of all species, including birds, insects and and ani

Maybe a dumb question, but I'm curious if the people of skyrim are actually fully aware that these gods do in fact exist, they all have different names for them, the khajiit see them as cats (I think?) Despite them having human forms, are maybe they appear differently to different people? Not sure, do yall know anything about this?