Is the existence of God axiomatic?

[McCulloch]

All too often the secularist or non-theist here challenges the Christian (or member of another religion) to offer evidence and proof for _______. This is an understandable request, but I have argued extensively on several threads here that God is trusted through faith and that particular notions of God are accepted as axioms (presuppositions, a priori truths, assumptions, etc.). If this is true, evidence cannot be offered for many of the words that fill in the above blank. This is the nature of an axiom. Many of the Christian perspectives on life are built on these axioms.

Question for debate: Is the existence of God axiomatic? Why or why not? How should one determine one's axioms?

[EduChris]

...Question for debate: Is the existence of God axiomatic? Why or why not? How should one determine one's axioms?

Theism is axiomatic if and only if one wishes to start with the most reasonable of any available axioms.

See here

And here

[theopoesis]

Question for debate: Is the existence of God axiomatic? Why or why not? How should one determine one's axioms?

My position should be clear from the OP, but I would add that some theisms do not treat God as such.

I haven't quite figured out how to determine which axioms to grant, as I think axioms arise prior to one's ability to analyze such axioms rationally (axioms being a prerequisite for reason as I understand it). I look forward to hearing others' thoughts on this.

In my opinions axioms arise pre-rationally as a result of history, experience, or culture in a way that they aren't often "chosen" as much as "received." As a Christian, I interpret this as by God through the Holy Spirit.

Thanks for starting this thread, McCulloch. You continue to earn my admiration as a worthy debate and dialogue partner, and an intelligent individual (how appropriate to sidestep my presuppositional critique of secularism by critiquing my presupposition!).

Best wishes to you.

[flitzerbiest]

All too often the secularist or non-theist here challenges the Christian (or member of another religion) to offer evidence and proof for _______. This is an understandable request, but I have argued extensively on several threads here that God is trusted through faith and that particular notions of God are accepted as axioms (presuppositions, a priori truths, assumptions, etc.). If this is true, evidence cannot be offered for many of the words that fill in the above blank. This is the nature of an axiom. Many of the Christian perspectives on life are built on these axioms.

Question for debate: Is the existence of God axiomatic? Why or why not? How should one determine one's axioms?

It depends, as these things so often do, on definitions. If, by axiomatic, you mean self-evident, then the answer is a resounding 'no'. If, by axiomatic, you mean a pre-rational assumption on which theorems can be built and tested, then of course. Theopoesis has already covered [edit: the implications of] this latter definition in his post.

[cnorman18]

I don't know if the term "axiom" is quite right, but I don't think that proving the existence of God is a major ongoing concern for most theists. I recall a conversation from my seminary days, when the question came up in some class or other: What would you say to an atheist on (whatever subject was under discussion)? After a moment, one of my classmates said, "I'd ask, 'What are you doing HERE?'" This was followed by general laughter. In context, it meant, "What are you doing studying in a Methodist seminary if you're an atheist?"

I think that point is well taken. Economists, advertising men, political pundits, and any number of people in professions that are based on less-than-concretely-and-obviously-useful areas of activity (cf. mechanics and carpenters) don't beat themselves up about constantly proving that their profession is based on true assumptions or that it is worthwhile; they thought those things before they began, or they wouldn't be doing it. It's not an axiom, exactly, but it is a baseline assumption that isn't examined much after one is engaged. Sure, economists, etc., CAN probably prove that their profession is valid or whatever more easily; but the fact is, they don't spend a lot of energy trying to do that. How you get there can vary, but once you're there you don't think about it much.

The Jewish attitude is similar from the get-go, from my reading; the rabbis of whatever age in history never spent much time trying to prove that God exists, if any time at all. The writings that seem to point in that direction are more about showing that belief in God is rational more than trying to prove that it's objectively true. If one doesn't think that God exists, then one will not perforce believe. No problem.

Of course it helps that for Jews, "salvation" in the Christian sense isn't an issue, and belief in God would be irrelevant to that issue if it were. Belief, as in assent to specific theological concepts, is a matter for individual decision in Judaism and is optional, determinative of nothing -- not even of whether or not one is a Jew or even an observant Jew.

You don't believe in God? So don't. Who cares? Have a bagel, let's talk about politics.

You want to cheat your business partner? NOW we need to talk.

[ChaosBorders]

Question for debate: Is the existence of God axiomatic? Why or why not? How should one determine one's axioms?

My personal view is that if one is going to believe in God at all, it should be an axiom. I probably feel this way due to annoyance felt when people try to prove God's existence using stupid arguments. I also think faulty arguments are an unfortunate thing to base one's belief on considering if anyone ever manages to get it through their thick skull why such an argument is illogical it's going to crush their belief system.

[WinePusher]

All too often the secularist or non-theist here challenges the Christian (or member of another religion) to offer evidence and proof for _______. This is an understandable request, but I have argued extensively on several threads here that God is trusted through faith and that particular notions of God are accepted as axioms (presuppositions, a priori truths, assumptions, etc.). If this is true, evidence cannot be offered for many of the words that fill in the above blank. This is the nature of an axiom. Many of the Christian perspectives on life are built on these axioms.

Question for debate: Is the existence of God axiomatic? Why or why not? How should one determine one's axioms?

C.S Lewis formed an argument known as the Argument from Religious Belief. Essentially, it states that every human desire has something that can fullfill this desire and that humans would not desire non-existent things. From the conception of human culture and history man has shown a strong desire and need for the divine, so the divine must therefore exist. Using this argument as a model, I would say that the existence of God is axiomatic and obvious.

[flitzerbiest]

All too often the secularist or non-theist here challenges the Christian (or member of another religion) to offer evidence and proof for _______. This is an understandable request, but I have argued extensively on several threads here that God is trusted through faith and that particular notions of God are accepted as axioms (presuppositions, a priori truths, assumptions, etc.). If this is true, evidence cannot be offered for many of the words that fill in the above blank. This is the nature of an axiom. Many of the Christian perspectives on life are built on these axioms.

Question for debate: Is the existence of God axiomatic? Why or why not? How should one determine one's axioms?

C.S Lewis formed an argument known as the Argument from Religious Belief. Essentially, it states that every human desire has something that can fullfill this desire and that humans would not desire non-existent things. From the conception of human culture and history man has shown a strong desire and need for the divine, so the divine must therefore exist. Using this argument as a model, I would say that the existence of God is axiomatic and obvious.

As the practice of religious indoctrination has become less universal, we are noticing that the ubiquitous religious impulse isn't as ubiquitous as it used to be. Combining this with CSL's argument, we conclude that God is dying. QED

[ChaosBorders]

All too often the secularist or non-theist here challenges the Christian (or member of another religion) to offer evidence and proof for _______. This is an understandable request, but I have argued extensively on several threads here that God is trusted through faith and that particular notions of God are accepted as axioms (presuppositions, a priori truths, assumptions, etc.). If this is true, evidence cannot be offered for many of the words that fill in the above blank. This is the nature of an axiom. Many of the Christian perspectives on life are built on these axioms.

Question for debate: Is the existence of God axiomatic? Why or why not? How should one determine one's axioms?

C.S Lewis formed an argument known as the Argument from Religious Belief. Essentially, it states that every human desire has something that can fullfill this desire and that humans would not desire non-existent things. From the conception of human culture and history man has shown a strong desire and need for the divine, so the divine must therefore exist. Using this argument as a model, I would say that the existence of God is axiomatic and obvious.

This is an absurd argument. I desire something that can give me the ability to teleport. That doesn't mean something exists that can give me the ability to teleport.

Furthermore, that argument leads to the conclusion God must exist. It isn't axiomatic at all.

[McCulloch]

C.S Lewis formed an argument known as the Argument from Religious Belief. Essentially, it states that every human desire has something that can fullfill this desire and that humans would not desire non-existent things. From the conception of human culture and history man has shown a strong desire and need for the divine, so the divine must therefore exist. Using this argument as a model, I would say that the existence of God is axiomatic and obvious.

When looking at theology presented by C.S. Lewis, one has to remember that he was not an American Evangelical Christian. He was firmly rooted in the Anglo-Catholic English tradition. I remember obtaining his Mere Christianity hoping for a reasoned defense of Christian primitivism. It was not. I was disappointed.