Arguments for God You're Unlikely to Hear

[Unknown Soldier]

If God exists, then why have so many people failed to convince everybody that he does exist? One answer to this question is that the apologetics to prove his existence lacks substance: It's just a lot of talk that can't be proved one way or another. It's not hard to think of ways to demonstrate God's existence that would be much more convincing if true. Here's a list of some possibilities:

The Argument from the Unique Traits of Evidence for Christianity:
Evidence for Christianity is unlike the evidence for other religions in that we write lots of books to defend our faith, we testify to our experiences with God, we have eyewitnesses to verify our beliefs, and we share stories of miracles and answers to our prayers. Heck, some of us even die for our faith, and we couldn't die that way if our religion is untrue. What other religion can offer such evidence?

The Argument From the Character of Christians:
If you skeptics want to see why God is real, then just look at the character of us Christians. Only the indwelling of the Holy Ghost can explain our superhuman honesty, trustworthiness, and sensible behavior. We never run from a challenge to our faith and will answer all questions no matter how tough those questions might be.

The Argument From The Substantive Presentation of God (We will show you God.):
If a jumble of words does not convince you, and you want to actually see God, then just lookee here--here he is!

The Argument from Knowledge:
I can tell you anything you want to know because I'm talking to God, and he will tell me things that I could never make up.

The Argument From Testing Prayer:
God's power is granted through prayer, so go ahead and test prayer to see if what I'm saying is true. If the prayer works, then you know I'm right. If the prayer fails, then you know I'm wrong and prayer is mere superstition.

The Argument From Read the Bible and See:
We are so confident that the Holy Bible is the word of God, that we ask you to read it and come to your own conclusions regarding its divine authorship. We will accept any conclusion you come to and will treat you with respect even if you disagree with us.

The Argument from Miraculous Demonstration:
1 Corinthians 12 clearly promises us Christians the power to heal miraculously, and I will prove it to be true. Get those TV cameras ready, and assemble the skeptics here in the front row here to be eyewitnesses. Now, see this amputee over here? Just watch me go restore his legs in the name of Jesus!

The Argument From Financial Self-Sufficiency:
We don't need your money! We have an all-mighty God who provides everything we need when we pray and trust him. We tell you to pray and have faith in God, so why would we to do anything different from that? We practice what we preach, after all.

 

[none]

Err...dam. I wish the thread title were: Arguments for God click here

 

[Copernicus]

The rhetorical technique here is sometimes referred to as a  Gish gallop. The idea is the spray out a large number of arguments with little or no regard for plausibility or accuracy. The arguer sits back and waits for every one of them to be addressed and soundly refuted, assuming that the case is made if even a single one hasn't been addressed. If someone actually bothers to address all of the purported arguments, the cherry picking and nitpicking begins.

The title of the thread is really misleading. I've heard versions of every single one of these claims, and not a single one is the least bit convincing. There are more popular arguments for a reason. Some of these are so poor, that they aren't worth refuting. Take the first one, for example. It is a bald assertion that Christianity is unique because its believers write lots of books, claim to have eyewitnesses to miracles, and people who are willing to die for their beliefs. Tell that to the deluded religious terrorists who flew airplanes into the Twin Towers and Pentagon or sent poor deluded souls to commit suicide bombings. Every religion comes prepackaged with such nonsense. I particularly liked the "argument from knowledge" one. All you have to do to believe that one is accept his claim that he is talking to God, so how could he be making stuff up?

 

[ideologyhunter]

The Argument from Watch Me Move This Great Big Mountain We're here in Olympia, Washington, and I am about to show you the reality of MT 17:20, where our Lord says that with the smallest amount of true faith -- which I have -- I will be able to say to a mountain, go hence from this place, and it will go, because, as Jesus says, NOTHING will be impossible. So, okay, watch closely. Hey, Mount Rainier! I command you in the name of Jesus of Nazareth, move yourself to Secaucus, New Jersey!!! Stand back, everyone.

 

[none]

The Argument from Watch Me Move This Great Big Mountain We're here in Olympia, Washington, and I am about to show you the reality of MT 17:20, where our Lord says that with the smallest amount of true faith -- which I have -- I will be able to say to a mountain, go hence from this place, and it will go, because, as Jesus says, NOTHING will be impossible. So, okay, watch closely. Hey, Mount Rainier! I command you in the name of Jesus of Nazareth, move yourself to Secaucus, New Jersey!!! Stand back, everyone.

Who's gonna question that?

 

[steve_bank]

If God exists, then why have so many people failed to convince everybody that he does exist? One answer to this question is that the apologetics to prove his existence lacks substance: It's just a lot of talk that can't be proved one way or another. It's not hard to think of ways to demonstrate God's existence that would be much more convincing if true. Here's a list of some possibilities:

The Argument from the Unique Traits of Evidence for Christianity:
Evidence for Christianity is unlike the evidence for other religions in that we write lots of books to defend our faith, we testify to our experiences with God, we have eyewitnesses to verify our beliefs, and we share stories of miracles and answers to our prayers. Heck, some of us even die for our faith, and we couldn't die that way if our religion is untrue. What other religion can offer such evidence?

The Argument From the Character of Christians:
If you skeptics want to see why God is real, then just look at the character of us Christians. Only the indwelling of the Holy Ghost can explain our superhuman honesty, trustworthiness, and sensible behavior. We never run from a challenge to our faith and will answer all questions no matter how tough those questions might be.

The Argument From The Substantive Presentation of God (We will show you God.):
If a jumble of words does not convince you, and you want to actually see God, then just lookee here--here he is!

The Argument from Knowledge:
I can tell you anything you want to know because I'm talking to God, and he will tell me things that I could never make up.

The Argument From Testing Prayer:
God's power is granted through prayer, so go ahead and test prayer to see if what I'm saying is true. If the prayer works, then you know I'm right. If the prayer fails, then you know I'm wrong and prayer is mere superstition.

The Argument From Read the Bible and See:
We are so confident that the Holy Bible is the word of God, that we ask you to read it and come to your own conclusions regarding its divine authorship. We will accept any conclusion you come to and will treat you with respect even if you disagree with us.

The Argument from Miraculous Demonstration:
1 Corinthians 12 clearly promises us Christians the power to heal miraculously, and I will prove it to be true. Get those TV cameras ready, and assemble the skeptics here in the front row here to be eyewitnesses. Now, see this amputee over here? Just watch me go restore his legs in the name of Jesus!

The Argument From Financial Self-Sufficiency:
We don't need your money! We have an all-mighty God who provides everything we need when we pray and trust him. We tell you to pray and have faith in God, so why would we to do anything different from that? We practice what we preach, after all.

There is nothing new on theist proofs of god in all that, just a general incoherent rant of sorts about Christians.

The proofs put forth tend to fall into a few general forms.

God exists because it is obvious from observing the universe.
The unversed could not exist without a creator therefore god exists.
I just know god exists.

My favorite the circular argument.

How do you know god exists?
Because god is in the bible.
How do you know the bible is true?
Because god is in the bible......

 

[Unknown Soldier]

The rhetorical technique here is sometimes referred to as a  Gish gallop. The idea is the spray out a large number of arguments with little or no regard for plausibility or accuracy. The arguer sits back and waits for every one of them to be addressed and soundly refuted, assuming that the case is made if even a single one hasn't been addressed. If someone actually bothers to address all of the purported arguments, the cherry picking and nitpicking begins.

That might be a problem in a "real-time" debate in front of an audience. In a forum like this one, though, so-called Gish gallops aren't so practical or effective. I have often seen very verbose posts in forums composed by apologists. I think that might be the tact used in forums by apologists who intend to overwhelm those with opposing views with a plethora of Bible verses, links, blatant errors, and obvious fallacies. I think the idea is to "hide the snakes in a field of high grass."

The title of the thread is really misleading. I've heard versions of every single one of these claims, and not a single one is the least bit convincing.

You've seriously heard Christians claim that they can actually show God to you or restore limbs on an amputee? What apologist ever said that churches don't need donations or tithes because God takes care of all that? Was it CS Lewis?

There are more popular arguments for a reason. Some of these are so poor, that they aren't worth refuting. Take the first one, for example. It is a bald assertion that Christianity is unique because its believers write lots of books, claim to have eyewitnesses to miracles, and people who are willing to die for their beliefs. Tell that to the deluded religious terrorists who flew airplanes into the Twin Towers and Pentagon or sent poor deluded souls to commit suicide bombings. Every religion comes prepackaged with such nonsense. I particularly liked the "argument from knowledge" one. All you have to do to believe that one is accept his claim that he is talking to God, so how could he be making stuff up?

The examples I listed in the OP are meant to be tongue-in-cheek. My point is that no apologist will try to use those kinds of arguments because they really would essentially prove God but don't work. In other words, the failure of those arguments would serve to underscore that God probably doesn't exist because the most obvious and strongest evidence for God is missing.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

The Argument from Watch Me Move This Great Big Mountain We're here in Olympia, Washington, and I am about to show you the reality of MT 17:20, where our Lord says that with the smallest amount of true faith -- which I have -- I will be able to say to a mountain, go hence from this place, and it will go, because, as Jesus says, NOTHING will be impossible. So, okay, watch closely. Hey, Mount Rainier! I command you in the name of Jesus of Nazareth, move yourself to Secaucus, New Jersey!!! Stand back, everyone.

That's a good example of The Argument from Miraculous Demonstration. Jesus was obviously wrong about faith moving mountains, so apologists will avoid that claim. If somebody does cite it, the apologist will no doubt argue that the passage is not meant to be taken literally. Any problematical Bible passage that is obviously false if taken literally must be interpreted figuratively to save the Bible from being seen as full of errors.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

The Argument from Watch Me Move This Great Big Mountain We're here in Olympia, Washington, and I am about to show you the reality of MT 17:20, where our Lord says that with the smallest amount of true faith -- which I have -- I will be able to say to a mountain, go hence from this place, and it will go, because, as Jesus says, NOTHING will be impossible. So, okay, watch closely. Hey, Mount Rainier! I command you in the name of Jesus of Nazareth, move yourself to Secaucus, New Jersey!!! Stand back, everyone.

Who's gonna question that?

Anybody who can think critically will question it. If God exists, then he has a tough time convincing those who actually scrutinize what he says. You would think that God would favor everybody and not just those who will believe anything.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

My favorite the circular argument.

How do you know god exists?
Because god is in the bible.
How do you know the bible is true?
Because god is in the bible......

Here's a more concise version: God exists because he wrote the Bible.

 

[excreationist]

If God exists, then why have so many people failed to convince everybody that he does exist?

I think "God" (the intelligent force in a possible simulation) doesn't want to be obvious....

https://talkfreethought.org/showthread.php?21819-A-God-without-compelling-evidence

From the Godfellas episode of Futurama:

"...Bender, being God isn't easy. If you do too much, people get dependent on you. And if you do nothing, they lose hope. You have to use a light touch like a safecracker or a pickpocket... When you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all."



I think the intelligent force only intervenes in a way that skeptics could explain as involving coincidence, delusion, hallucinations, or fraud.

This would make the possible simulation more immersive. It could involve a personal game of "hide and seek"..... (see post #91)

I'm the only person I've come across that uses some of that episode from Futurama as a serious theological argument.... so you're unlikely to hear it from someone else.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

I think the intelligent force only intervenes in a way that skeptics could explain as involving coincidence, delusion, hallucinations, or fraud.

You would think that the intelligent force would be intelligent enough to make sure his followers don't act like they're mentally ill. It's bad for PR.

 

[excreationist]

I think the intelligent force only intervenes in a way that skeptics could explain as involving coincidence, delusion, hallucinations, or fraud.

You would think that the intelligent force would be intelligent enough to make sure his followers don't act like they're mentally ill. It's bad for PR.

For me the only message I believe I get from a possible non-obvious "intelligent force" is that it seems to be present at times during "hide and seek". It is possible that any messages further than that are deceptive or are non-supernatural delusions. 2 Corinthians 11:14b says ".... Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light".

Since I came up with that sentence you quoted (about coincidences, etc) I don't think I've acted like I'm mentally illl.... in fact I forget about God a lot of the time but sometimes pray to it and it can have a placebo kind of effect.

As far as PR goes, I think the intelligent force could have a sense of humour.... e.g.
https://www.lifesplayer.com/instagram.php#connect4
(this happened before I came up with that quote - and this example obviously would involve skeptics saying it was a coincidence)

 

[Copernicus]

...
The examples I listed in the OP are meant to be tongue-in-cheek. My point is that no apologist will try to use those kinds of arguments because they really would essentially prove God but don't work. In other words, the failure of those arguments would serve to underscore that God probably doesn't exist because the most obvious and strongest evidence for God is missing.

If you want to present an honest argument that God exists, then do so. If you want to amuse people with a tongue-in-cheek post, then let people know that that you aren't being serious. I don't speak for others, but I really don't appreciate having my time wasted.

 

[ideologyhunter]

Holy Shit. I don't think he had to spell it out any clearer. The OP is clearly a satire of apologetics, which is why I posted what I did. If you have to explain a joke...

 

[Copernicus]

Holy Shit. I don't think he had to spell it out any clearer. The OP is clearly a satire of apologetics, which is why I posted what I did. If you have to explain a joke...

Then it isn't obvious that it was a joke, except maybe to people more familiar with Unknown Soldier. A smiley would have sufficed to get his message across. Frankly, I have been in conversations with theists who make claims that are as stupid as the ones he posted, so I fell for the act. Still a little pissed that he wasted my time, but I understand that people can get bored and like to amuse themselves. Joke's on me.

 

[ideologyhunter]

I'll beat this dead horse again, 'cause the 2 x 4 feels good in my hand.
Really, just re-read his Argument from Read the Bible and See -- it's very clear here that it's not a believer explaining his beliefs. Believers are made the butt of the joke, because they traditionally won't support variant interpretations of their scriptures. (See how deadly dull it gets, when you parse a satire?)

 

[steve_bank]

Holy Shit. I don't think he had to spell it out any clearer. The OP is clearly a satire of apologetics, which is why I posted what I did. If you have to explain a joke...

Don't take the name of the Holy Shit in vein.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

Since I came up with that sentence you quoted (about coincidences, etc) I don't think I've acted like I'm mentally illl.... in fact I forget about God a lot of the time but sometimes pray to it and it can have a placebo kind of effect.

When I say that religiosity can resemble mental illness I don't mean that religious people are necessarily stark raving mad. The large majority of religious people are generally stable and sensible. However, when people like Christians pray, they are attempting to telepathically communicate with an invisible man in the sky. That's an obvious delusion no matter how many people do it or accept it as sensible.

I should stress that I mean no disrespect to people who are mentally ill. They are human beings who should be respected, valued, and included in everything society has to offer. That said, we should not disregard their mental illness and offer them the best psychological treatments available. Religion tends to mask mental illness, and sadly the result is that much mental illness goes undiagnosed and untreated.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

If you want to present an honest argument that God exists, then do so. If you want to amuse people with a tongue-in-cheek post, then let people know that that you aren't being serious. I don't speak for others, but I really don't appreciate having my time wasted.

Were you looking for arguments for God that are convincing? You're not likely to get them from me because I don't know of any. Whenever you read anything you're never guaranteed that you're going to like it or find what you want.

Anyway, Ideologyhunter got my point right away. Although I do use some subtle humor in the OP, I'm very serious that Christian apologists have little of substance to offer when they argue for God's existence. If the Christian God really exists, then apologists could offer everything in the OP. Since apologists can't offer such clear and unambiguous evidence, they're not making their case for God, and his existence is then very questionable.

Got it?