Are there good reasons to believe that a god exists?

[Jashwell]

"Are there good reasons to believe that a god exists?"

Doesn't seem like much preamble is needed, but expect this largely to be filled (if at all) with arguments in favour of the existence of a God and counter-arguments. (Because the question is not "Are there good reasons to believe that a god does not exist?"). Though if you do think you have a good argument that shows it is reasonable to believe God does not exist, that is also valid.

This question comes up a lot in other threads where various classical arguments (e.g. ontological, axiological, cosmological) have been given in those threads.

If possible, try not to shotgun debate by raising lots of arguments at once. One sound argument should be sufficient.

[kenblogton]

.
1.

The key issue is whether something can come from nothing.

Correction: The key issue is the OP question "Are there good reasons to believe that a god exists?"

The "something from nothing" vs "something from a god (that cannot be shown to be anything more than imaginary) argument is a theoretical question that neither proves or disproves involvement of a "god" but is a common diversionary tactic for those who cannot cite actual reasons for existence of "gods."

2.

Some small number of atheists have acknowledged that something cannot come from nothing, but the vast majority claim that something can come from nothing. However, none has provided a single example, relying instead on evasion of the issue.

Perhaps it would be more accurate to say that most Atheists have not stated a position on the "something from nothing" issue.

3.

Therefore, I declare victory for the Deists.

Declarations of "victory" are generally regarded as inaccurate, inappropriate, and as a form of self-aggrandizement.

Reply to 1. If you read my reply, the existence of God is contingent upon something not coming from nothing. The question is very practical, not theoretical.

Reply to 2. Not stating a position is avoiding or evading the issue.

Reply to 3. This is a debate. In debate format, it could be stated as Resolved: There are no good reasons to believes that a god exists. The key or fundamental issue underlying the resolution is whether something can come from nothing, or whether something comes from something. In the absence of evidence from the yays on something coming from nothing, the nays have it.
kenblogton

[kenblogton]

[Replying to post 182 by Jashwell]

Please read my reply to Zzyzx. It explains my position.
Thanks kenblogton

[Jashwell]

[Replying to post 192 by kenblogton]

If God may come from neither something nor "nothing" (as it is by now clear that by "nothing" you do not mean "no thing"), then to avoid special pleading so may the Universe.

You have not once addressed the fact that either context of eternal - "not coming into existence" and "for all time" may apply to the Universe when considered across the entire time line, regardless of whether or not it is finite. (The latter is trivially true - of course time exists for all of time)

[jcb]

[Replying to post 192 by kenblogton]

If God may come from neither something nor "nothing" (as it is by now clear that by "nothing" you do not mean "no thing"), then to avoid special pleading so may the Universe.

You have not once addressed the fact that either context of eternal - "not coming into existence" and "for all time" may apply to the Universe when considered across the entire time line, regardless of whether or not it is finite. (The latter is trivially true - of course time exists for all of time)

The universe did come from nothing of visible substance. Science will have to admit it sooner or later. As for the universe being infinite/time without end, this is completely false according to science. As science recently described it, the universe is like a rubber band that will not break. It will continue to stretch and stretch until eventually it will all collapse back to what it originally was, which is nothing. This is exactly what The Bible says (though in different words) will occur.

Science is proving the existence of a Supreme Power (God), they just don't know it yet.

[Zzyzx]

.

Reply to 1. If you read my reply, the existence of God is contingent upon something not coming from nothing. The question is very practical, not theoretical.

Since the "something from nothing" issue has not been resolved (and may not be), it is nothing more than an opinion or conjecture " neither of which is valid / verifiable evidence.

Theists often attempt to justify a belief in "gods" with "Everything must have a beginning" and "Something cannot come from nothing" EXCEPT my favorite god."

Reply to 2. Not stating a position is avoiding or evading the issue.

I disagree.

There can be many reasons for not stating a position " including "There is insufficient information available upon which to base an informed, intelligent decision." Another is "When something cannot be shown to be anything more than imaginary, there is no reason to take a position one way or another."

A common tactic in debate is to present a dichotomy and insist that others choose one of the two options presented.

Reply to 3. This is a debate. In debate format, it could be stated as Resolved: There are no good reasons to believes that a god exists. The key or fundamental issue underlying the resolution is whether something can come from nothing, or whether something comes from something.

Let's apply that to the thousands of proposed "gods": where do they come from? A god factory in the sky? Human imagination? Something else?

In the absence of evidence from the yays on something coming from nothing, the nays have it.

Thus, the absence of evidence for thousands of "gods" being more than imagination means that "the nays have it." Right?

[Jashwell]

[Replying to post 194 by jcb]

"[The universe] will all collapse back to what it originally was"
The Universe won't collapse. The Big Crunch has been heavily discredited. The expansion rate of the Universe is increasing. All the science suggests that the Universe will not collapse.
Unless you think falling from a steep cliff towards the rocky ground below is an indication that you'll be on your way towards the sky above you (literally speaking, no metaphors intended), this is not a reasonable claim.

"As for the universe being infinite/time without end, this is completely false according to science." I didn't say it was infinite, I didn't say it was without end, science does not say it's not infinite, science does not say it's with end. Many prevailing theoretical and untested cosmological models predict that time had a boundary in the finite past (a kind of 'beginning'), but I'm unaware of any that say time will end in the finite future.

"The Universe did come from nothing of visible substance"
Not sure what's meant by this.
There's lots of invisible substance, like air.
Unless you want to address what we're actually talking about - that "the Universe came from nothing" means "the Universe did not come from something" - two interpretations of which being that the Universe came without origin, and that the Universe didn't come. (The latter of which I support, being a B-time supporter)

[jcb]

[Replying to post 194 by jcb]

"[The universe] will all collapse back to what it originally was"
The Universe won't collapse. The Big Crunch has been heavily discredited. The expansion rate of the Universe is increasing. All the science suggests that the Universe will not collapse.
Unless you think falling from a steep cliff towards the rocky ground below is an indication that you'll be on your way towards the sky above you (literally speaking, no metaphors intended), this is not a reasonable claim.

"As for the universe being infinite/time without end, this is completely false according to science." I didn't say it was infinite, I didn't say it was without end, science does not say it's not infinite, science does not say it's with end. Many prevailing theoretical and untested cosmological models predict that time had a boundary in the finite past (a kind of 'beginning'), but I'm unaware of any that say time will end in the finite future.

"The Universe did come from nothing of visible substance"
Not sure what's meant by this.
There's lots of invisible substance, like air.
Unless you want to address what we're actually talking about - that "the Universe came from nothing" means "the Universe did not come from something" - two interpretations of which being that the Universe came without origin, and that the Universe didn't come. (The latter of which I support, being a B-time supporter)

Debate it out with the scientists that took part in the televised documentary. They say in a billion+ years the universe will collapse back to what it originally was.

[Jashwell]

[Replying to post 197 by jcb]

A billion years is certainly false. The Observable Universe is

[Jashwell]

[Replying to post 197 by jcb]

A billion years is certainly false. The Observable Universe has a radius of over 40 billion light years.

That means it'd take at least 40 billion years, if everything was heading towards the average point at the speed of light (which it isn't - objects are moving AWAY from us) (which wouldn't be possible due to gravity - space would literally have to collapse itself, while we observe it to be expanding).

Could you name the documentary? It's likely either outdated or has dubious sources.

[jcb]

[Replying to post 197 by jcb]

A billion years is certainly false. The Observable Universe has a radius of over 40 billion light years.

That means it'd take at least 40 billion years, if everything was heading towards the average point at the speed of light (which it isn't - objects are moving AWAY from us) (which wouldn't be possible due to gravity - space would literally have to collapse itself, while we observe it to be expanding).

Could you name the documentary? It's likely either outdated or has dubious sources.

You did not read what I wrote. I wrote a billion+. I don't remember how many billion that will be. If scientist is false on this they must then be false on all else they claim the same as people say about the existence of God.