Why do you believe what you believe?

Stainless, do some reading on the various "logical fallacies." I think you will find them very interesting, and the better aware you are of them, the more quickly you can tear down weak arguments.

You should also check out some of Christopher Hitchens' writing. When the author of that xtianitytoday article starts out by claiming that Hitchens and the others "lack intellectual muscle," it is akin to a mouse deriding the strength of a lion. The article calls them out immediately to provide a warm blanket for the believer to cuddle up in. One should not be surprised when an article in a religious publication arrives at the conclusion of god's existence.

Below is my read on the patent flaws in each of the previous arguments, commenting at the most egregiously erroneous line item within each set, and discarding all follow-ons.

Cosmological
2) If the universe has an explanation of its existence, that explanation is god.

The only way this can work is if you disassociate the meaning of "god" from its religious content. Making the word "god" to be shorthand for the events at the beginning of the universe does not support any basis of religion. "God" becomes an empty term devoid of authority over human activity.

Kalam (a more, but not exclusively, Muslim form of the cosmological argument)
No claim of the existence of a god was made here.

Teleological (Intelligent Design is a form of telelogical argument)
2) It is not due to physical necessity or chance.
There is no support for making such a claim.


Moral (perhaps weakest of all)
1) If god does not exist, objective moral values and duties do not exist.
There is no prerequisite of a "god" for morality or duty. Morality and duty can be fully based upon the collective needs of a society in its struggle for survival. Objective morals do NOT exist, they ARE subjective. Sometimes they correlate across cultures, sometimes they don't.

Ontological
2) If it is possible that a maximally great being exists, than a maximally great being exists in some possible world.
No reason that what can possibly exist does exist. The space shuttle was always possible, but did not actually exist until designed and built.

 

These are equally silly arguments rationalizing the existence of a god. And yet if believers are honest, they will find that these are the most similar to their underlying support for religion.

1) The world is difficult.
2) A human being needs help in order to survive.
3) There must be a source of help.
4) That source of help is god.

1) The world is puzzling.
2) Human beings do not know all of the answers.
3) Humans can never know all of the answers.
4) That which cannot be answered is a secret being held from us by someone.
5) That someone must be superhuman.
6) A superhuman creature must be god.

1) I am special.
2) Good things and bad things happen to me, from outside my control.
3) Someone must be interested in me and making these things happen for some reason.
4) That someone is god.
5) God exists.

1) The concept of death is scary.
2) Something must exist afterward, because I am too special to simply "end."
3) We must go somewhere afterward.
4) Someone must be in charge there.
5) That someone must be god.

1) There seems to be no justice in the world.
2) Injustice can never go unresolved.
3) There must be an afterlife which resolves injustice.
4) Someone must be keeping score to determine what our afterlives will be.
5) That someone must be god.

1) I like money and importance.
2) Those who speak for god get money and importance, and have tax advantages.
3) I shall speak for god.
4) Maybe god exists or maybe he doesn't, but now I have money and importance.

 

My mom just got a book that we are reading, and it is quite fasicinating. It goes and gives evidence and etc on the Exodus, and proves that it did happen. It's called the Gold of The Exodus, and it's a great book, now out of print, and tough to find from what I've heard. But I can post some of the things that it talks about and offers as proof to the exodus, and if that happened, wouldn't that have enough proof alone that the God mentioned in the Bible exists??

Phoenix

 

If you could find correlation between natural events or historical events and the timing of the bible, the bible's explanation for the events is not automatically correct. So no, it's not enough.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.

 

Thanks for the advice, will check on it...

stainless

 

Everyone reading this knows that I believe. Without a doubt. And that agnostics and athiests would want evidence along the same lines that Thomas did (he wouldn't believe in the Resurrection without seeing the risen Christ's wounds). "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof" after all.

As I see it, we're arguing past one another. Something to which I grant the highest earthly authority - the Bible - is discounted by agnostics and atheists, while something that agnostics and atheists hold has the highest authority - laws of nature - is trumped in my mind by the witness of my authority. We're not even operating under the same assumptions as we debate.

Therefore, I'm going to step aside from posting in this particular argument (although I will continue to read it). I said some things a few posts back of which I'm not proud, and that came from getting frustrated over our debating from seperate assumptions. To all of you, and to Stainless in particular, I offer my humble apologies.

 

I have said it before you either have a belief or you dont. IMHO both sets of values are equaly valid for the person giving them

 

Simplicity just struck me.

I believe what I believe in because I have the freedom to do so.
I also have the right to change my mind.

We ALL do it's just some aren't as free to express it.

 

Exactly. You really can't debate beliefs in a useful way. Which is why I don't engage much in these threads...although I do read them at times and might replay occasionally. But, to try and debate it...I just don't see the point.

I read these threads and I often wonder if the OP is trying to get validation for what he believes or what is the reason behind these reoccurring threads. I don't know whether there is a sense of insecurity or whether it is a type of zealousness or what. And, yes, there are agnostic and atheist zealots just like there are religious zealots.

 

Yes, I apologize too, I had NO right to call your arguments no good, it is not my place.

stainless

 

I dont believe in a god but I dont discount that one might exist, I have simply never experience one shred of evidence that there is a supreme being and it would be dishonest to pretend.

One thing I find interesting is that people speak like there IS a god without doubt, but when a person who is in doubt comes in, they say you have to have faith...you need to believe. This seems to me like they are saying that they DONT know that there is a god. I dont have to believe or have faith that the chair I am sitting on exists...thats true with anything KNOWN to exist...it doesnt require faith.

I have to pretty much hide how I feel about the divine in everyday life as I live in an area with a lot of Christians who react poorly to someone who doesn't believe. I have been fired from a job, told how much pity they have for me, as my life must be so empty and miserable without god. I have also been told that it is impossible for me to have any moral grounding without god thus I must be completely immoral...they cannot imagine that a person can have a strong moral code that does not come from rewards and punishments of heaven or hell but more from the real world fact that we all must live together on the earth. Life is hard so why make it any harder...Do unto other doesn't have to be about god, just common sense given the nature of our co-existence. Because they seem so sure they are right, they treat me like there is something wrong with me...So most people I work with dont know how I feel about it and when they are talking about their beliefs in god I just listen and nod with a smile

There was a study on atheism recently that showed that most of America distrusts people who dont believe in god. Like the elder Bush said 'Athiest cant be Americans.' They assume people who dont believe in God have no morals thus they should never be trusted...absurd.

I used to debate religion and god with people but I soon found that peoples beliefs in this area seldom if ever change and its a personal subjective thing anyway so why SHOULD I care what they believe. I simply dont care to discuss it much anymore much save here and there in a thread like this with people who dont know me and have no say over my life.

I am not uptight about religion as most people I know believe in some form of god or another...most people I know keep that belief to themselves and approach it as what it is...personal belief that should not be forced upon others as it is not shared by all. I in turn do not insist that my money have no reference to god, balk at god in the pledge (something I think all should know and kids should say like I did in school). I dont think there needs to be overt god in things like politics and government as each politician will bring with him or her thier own beliefs, there is no need to infuse government with an official policy regarding god and religion...most if not all of our so called leaders are christians, that doesnt bother me.

Although I feel like I must keep my opinions on God a secret from most...I do admit things have changed for the better...nobody it shoving a hot poker through my tongue for daring to express thoughts of disbelief. There is a begrudging acceptance of my right to not worship a god from most.

When I was younger I disliked religious people because I knew all the wrong kinds of religious people...the type that approaches you in the laundry mat to ask if you are saved...the kind who looks to infuse god into government and curriculum, the kind that see's it as a war or battle for supremacy, with 5 religious bumper stickers on the car and thanking god for everything all the time...I soon met believers who were much more agreeable, they believed but understood everyone doesnt agree with them and that there is a time and a place.

So I started thinking 'who am I to say they are wrong!!'. I am an agnostic not an atheist and can honestly say I dont know, nor will I pretend I do know. If I experience something that proves it to me, then things might change. Until then I do not believe, nor do I refute the possibility, there are all kinds of strange amazing things, who knows. I will admit I lean towards atheism as I have yet to see any shred of evidence save that of others (subjective), I have always been told that I must make a leap of faith or open myself to the possibility...but I have never had to do that with anything else that truly exists...to me it always seemed like they were saying 'yeah...we cant prove it, just stop thinking about it and believe.' I used to obsess and try to prove (or demand proof) or disprove the existence of god...these days I tend to think that is not my responsibility. The burden of proof is with those who think god exists if they truly wish to prove to others beyond doubt god exists and put an end to the endless debate. Like KLJ says...when debating this topic...me and a person who believes in god are not even working from the same page, we do not agree on the most fundamental levels thus what he would call proof, I could not accept and the other way around...he would not accept what I say because we are simply on such different tracks that we do not meet and agree on almost any level of the subject at hand.

The way I see it is that THEY are the ones saying something I cannot see, feel, taste, touch, or hear exists. It is they who are saying that an all powerful being, all knowing, unseen, entity exists. It is they who said a man rose from the dead, worked miracles and was the son of this being...and all the other fantastic stories of things I have yet to witness in my time. I feel that it is unfair that people then had plenty of evidence god existed!! If I saw a man part a sea, that would certainly relieve all doubts from my mind that some greater power existed!!! Here I am told simply to have faith. Those people who witnessed these acts didnt have to have faith, it was proven to them.

When the idea of atoms was introduced...they did not tell us just to have faith that all things were made of of atoms that were invisible to the naked eye. They did not just say...take our word for it, just believe. If they had they would have been laughed at and kicked to the curb!! They produced the theory and then worked very hard to prove it, and they did. When they looked to establish for a fact that atoms, undetectable by normal human senses, existed the burden of proof was on them and they did not stop until they produced empirical, irrefutable evidence that atoms were indeed a reality.

I look upon religion in the same way...I am not the one insisting that something I cannot prove exists. If I say that invisible fairies (or whatever) exist all around us, people would call me crazy and demand proof. For some reason God has never been expected by most to stand up to the same scrutiny. If people insist god exist I say prove it...if they tell me I cannot disprove it...they are right nor do I think its my place to try...it is not my theory. If someone tells me he has an invisible friend...I wont spend my time attempting to disprove that. Now if they said they had an invisible friend and then that invisible friend talks to me, then I would figure there might be something more than just his word. Nor would I spend time attempting to disprove something like God as there is no real evidence one way or the other to recommend it as a valid theory. Believers to me are like scientists who have a completely unproven theory they are wishing to push as fact...if they wish it to be universally accepted as fact, the burden of proof in on them as the default would be, when presented with a theory that had never been proven regarding something unseen, would be doubt until proof is presented. If I had never read or experienced people who say god existed, if I was raised in a bubble and had never been introduced to the concept by others, I would not have come up with the idea of a god as I have never experienced anything in my daily life, save the words of others, to make me naturally develop the idea that maybe there is a god on my own.

As for the possibility of me going to hell for not believing...true, I might find I am wrong. On the other hand, those people who devote their lives to god, Allah, Christ, etc...may die having wasted much of their life going to church, worshiping, following, contemplating a god that doesnt exist...for many god consumes much of their life and at least I lived my life and tried to make the most of it while I am here because I am not guaranteed anything but this one go round.

In the end I think people should believe exactly how they wish as long as it doesnt burden others. I am suspicious of anyone who seems to have an interest in my beliefs and my so called 'soul'. I do not think that interest come from real concern. I believe the main reason why people look to convert others to their way of thinking is there is strength in numbers...

If one person says 'I think there is an invisible all knowing all powerful creator of all things'...or...'I think invisible faeries exist'...people will think they are crazy. If thousands or even millions of people also say this, it reinforces their own belief and make the fantastic seem a bit more logical. Millions of people cant be wrong...right? I have seen believers get frustrated and angry just hearing dissenting opinions however politely they are put. When there is so little to recommend a concept as real...having large amounts of people around you to reinforce that its NOT crazy to believe in dead men rising and all powerful super beings, its easier.

sorry for the long post, its been a while since I talked about this.

 

PS, I am in no way looking to bicker and I in no way want to insult anyone...if I did with something I said I am sorry...my heated religious and political debate days are over...I just felt the need to express an opinion on the subject...its just person opinions and you know what they say about those...

 

lol.....this is the first post over 1,000 words I have read the whole way through...

Very well put and very interesting

stainless

 

Here's a bit about that book I was talking about:

From The Publisher:

For many, it is the most sacred place on Earth - the site where God descended to give Moses the Ten commandments. Yet for centuries, mankind has not known its exact location. In this heart-pounding true story, award-winning journalist and bestselling author Howard Blum tells the enthralling account of two modern-day adventurers - Larry Williams, a two-time Republican candidate for the U.S. Senate from Montana and a self-made millionaire, and his friend Bob Cornuke, a retired policemen and former SWAT team member. Lured by the prospectof finding the fabled fortune in gold that the ancient Hebrews took with them when they fled from Egypt, the two men set out to find the true site of Mount Sinai - with only the Old Testament as a guide.

Eminent biblical scholars at Harvard and the University of Pennsylvania have argued that Mount Sinai is not in the Sinai Peninsula at all, but rather in northwestern Saudi Arabia. However, they were never allowed into the kingdom to prove their argument. When Cornuke and Williams are also denied entry, they daringly sneak into Saudi Arabia. And what they discover at the mountain known as Jabal al Lawz will astonish the world - and inspire readers to rethink the role of the Bible in history. They find the remains of the stone altar at which the Golden Calf was worshiped, the twelve pillars that Moses ordered to be erected, the cave where Moses slept, and, most sensationally, the unnaturally scorched spot on the mountaintop where God gave Moses the two stone tablets. They also explain, in a fascinating account, the truth about the parting of the Red Sea waters. And not the least of their discoveries is the fact that one of the most sacred spots on earth is not a top secret Saudi military base. As these two adventurers follow in Moses' footsteps, they become pawns in a dangerous game of international power politics and intrigue, This action-packed tale - part high-tech treasure hunt, part modern-day spy thriller, and part biblical detective story - is riveting. And it is all true.

Phoenix

 

I don't buy the story, but I'd go see the movie.

 

What's there to buy, when they have evidence to back there claims? They have the evidence, pics, and all, to prove what they say is truth (most importantly, what the Bible says is truth.) One of those guys started out as an agnostic, the other an atheist, but after that, they are definetly believers. I can't really see what more you expect, LOL, you ask for evidence to back extrodarinary claims, and they have it. After reading a little bit of the book, and seeing the pictures, I strongly believe the Exodus happened. But, believe what you want, I'm not here to tell you what to believe, I'm just trying to show evidence to back up those "extrodarinary" claims.

Phoenix

 

Ever watch the "Naked Archaeologist" television program on the History Channel? Well, they pretty much debunked this story simply using Biblical evidence, topography, and geometry, like the # of days Moses traveled, the layout of the land, and what is reported to be on the top of the mountain.

Take Care
Ben

 

Phoenix,

this is not evidence for god.

An important Egyptian historical manuscript was discovered in Egypt more than a century ago.

Remarkably, this ancient papyrus parallels the history of the Exodus account as found in the Scriptures. This manuscript recorded the writings of an ancient Egyptian named Ipuwer. The papyrus manuscript, now called the Ipuwer Papyrus, was discovered by someone named Anastasi in the area of Memphis, near the pyramids of Saqqara in Egypt.


makes you wonder if it was copied......

stainless

 

So it paralles the scriptures acount of the Exodus, Um so something in the Bible is right then?

 

This old video just about sums up ALL religions... IMHO that is. Watch the whole thing if you want to understand it.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3684328089209893943