I am looking to read more and explore the idea of God's existence but I haven't found any good books that outline the arguments for and against it (other than the C.S. Lewis/Freud book that compares their writings, which I didn't think was that compelling).
212544
upallnite certainly has what you need for the against side. Here's the for side... First is a debate between a Christian and an atheist friend.\n\nhttp://www.thirdmill.org/files/english/practical_theology/PT.HOF_Chuck.Colson.Dialogue_11.03.03.pdf\nhttp://www.str.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=5350\nhttp://www.apologetics.com/default.jsp?bodycontent=pages/articles.jsp&pagetitle=Articles\nhttp://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/qa.asp\nhttp://www.christiananswers.net/\nhttp://www.christiananswers.net/menu-at1.html\n\nBooks... Alleged discrepancies in the Bible by John Haley\n\nDifficulties in the Bible by R.A. Torrey\n\nBible Answers to Almost All Your Questions by Elmer Towns\n\nThe Bible Answer Book by Hank Hanegraaff\n\nAll can be found or ordered at Books a Million.
563259
No one can know the mind of God, because I don’t think anything written in ANY religious book is from a divine source, it’s from people who were trying to control the status quo in whatever time it was written.  It had more to do with politics than it did worship.
91263
You left one of your list: "God said so" or "I've had personal experience with God."  Those people scare me.\n\nThe Bible is a good book.  The stories are engaging and are generally pleasant to read.  But that doesn't make it true.  I think that in part Christians believe in God for the same reason I'd like to believe that the Harry Potter books are true.  \n\nBut beyond that, the purpose of religion is to explain the unexplainable, to provide a source of morality, and to try to address the age-old question of the meaning of life.  If people believe they are serving God, they feel that their life has purpose.  If people believe in God, they can start to determine if they are good people because at least they know what it means to be a good person.  Whether or not they live up to their moral ideals, at least they know what to strive for.  If people believe in the Biblical myths, they know where they came from, why there here, and why things are they way they are.  Even if that knowledge is entirely wrong, they don't have to wonder about it.  Religion also provides continuity and some sort of stability from day to day, week to week, and generation to generation.\n\nNo one's going to be able to give you factual evidence for the existance of God because he doesn't exist.  But I'm not sure that even matters.  Believing in God isn't about being right it's about believing.  I'm not sure that the accuracy of the stories is really relevent to their power.\n\nBut that said, I'm still an atheist :)
662516
Have you heard of Occam's razor?\nIt says that to explain a framework, entities should not be multiplied beyond necessity.\n\nFurthermore, when multiple competing theories have equal predictive powers, the principle recommends selecting those that introduce the fewest assumptions and postulate the fewest hypothetical entities.\n\nNow, let's say God created heaven and earth. We introduce another element into the framework - God, that brings with it a whole new range of questions like Who created God, when did he start existing, what before him.\n\nThis doesn't simplify the argument, but makes it more complex. So, explain it with the least set of assumptions, being everything based on scientific principles which are all explained by mathematics.\n\nHope this is a logical and respectful argument.
554196
If you haven't already, you should see the movie (or read the book) Contact. The romantic interest in that story is between an atheist scientist and a Christan priest. The book was written by Carl Sagan.\n\nIf you can pull it off, you should try to have some dialog in which the atheist explains that he (she?) is not so much against the idea of a god, but that he thinks that the Bible is just myth, and came up with a very unlikely god. That Jesus Christ was probably a wise man and a great teacher but just a man. The Christian can respond about feeling God's presense and feeling that the Bible is true. The atheist can question how she knows her feelings aren't must misinterpretations and wishful thinking.\n\nIt would be interesting If you could pull off that dialog in a believable but sensitive way and really explore the boundaries of that conflict.
181419
I recommend that you look into the folklore literature which will demonstrate how similar the bible and its themes are to other mythologies. Joseph Campbell and Carl Jung are excellent authors to start with. Christians basically believe what every other faith believes. Their way is the only TRUE path to God. In my opinion (as a Christian) that's incredibly narrow-minded. If you've read the Chronicles of Narnia (and if you haven't you should) the last chapter of book 7 "The last Battle" has a scene where Aslan (Christ) allows a young man who was a follower of Tash (another god/demon) into the real Narnia (Heaven) because his actions were congruent with the Aslan's teachings even though the young man didn't realize it. Basically I believe that those who are following Christ's spirit or philosophy even if they're not doing so in name have as much if not more truth than most christians.
624327
I wrote an article related to this... I hope you will take the time to really read it because it covers all the questions that you are asking. I wrote this paper not to accuse others... but to defend my faith in light of statements people ask concerning my faith in light of what I have learned from science. \n\n"Biblical Creationism: Fact or Myth? \nScientific Evidences for Skeptics to Ponder"\n\nDo you know what life is? I believe it's like a science experiment. We're here to find out why we are here. Unless you know a better reason, I'd say, it is to be skeptical and figure things out. \n\nIn case you didn't know; "skeptic" is a Greek word that means "to examine". We need to examine all the evidence and make up our minds what the truth is. I think that a lot of people get college degrees but devote themselves to one particular school of thought. They follow those thoughts without question and enjoy the mutual companionship of their closed group of peers. Most never realize that their grand theories are founded on mere presuppositions that have little to do with the facts.\n\nI think that a lot of people would believe in God right now if He personally appeared to them. If God appeared to anyone, in any form, it would be enough to convince them it was really Him! But then we wouldn't have a choice; no opportunity to grasp love's concepts. God does not want to force us to follow Him; just be willing to make that choice for ourselves!\n\nThink about it; all the ancient religions taught that the universe had no beginning,... but one. Some taught that gods came out of sort of a watery substance and that the earth was made through great upheavals and violence between the gods. A religion is worthless unless it is grounded in scientific facts! If there is such a religion today, then we better find out what the truth is in all this!\n\nI believe the God of the Bible is the most logical explanation for our universe as we know it today. Consider these next few statements of rational logic. First, there has to be a cause for every effect. The universe had to come from something. There is no natural explanation for how the sun, moon, and stars could come from nothing! Therefore, for every effect, there has to be a cause! This Cause has to come from outside the universe; outside of nature. In other words;...supernatural. When I state "supernatural" I mean; a limitless being outside of time and space. Think about it! The only religion that ever stated otherwise was the biblical concept of Genesis! God always existed, but the universe did not!\n\nSecond, the Cause must be independent of it's effect. It can not be required to depend it's existence upon the universe. For nothing can change from a state of nothingness.\n\nThird, the Cause must be infinitely powerful! If it were limited, it would have to be confined by some other thing. It can not be limited by nothing and if it were limited, it would not be independent any longer. The effect can not be greater than the cause. The Cause has to be greater than the effect! It has to be greater than all the forces of the universe combined!\n\nFourth, the first Cause must be eternal. The creator must exist outside of time. The God of the Bible stated this in Exodus 3:14 and John 8:58. All the other religions honored harvest gods, war gods, moon gods, sun gods, animal-headed gods, fertility gods and goddesses. In fact, most of these gods were restricted to time as well as location. (1)\n\nFifth, the first Cause must be spiritual. Only an entity outside the universe could have created it. It must be beyond the physical elements. John 4:24 states that God is Spirit.\n\nSixth, the first Cause must be all-knowing. The creator created the universe. Albert Einstein wrote, "The harmony of natural law... reveals and intelligence of such superiority that compared with it, all the systematic thinking and acting of human beings is an
357779
I really don't know specifically what biblical writing forbids it, but many years ago, I had an experience with my father who is a fundamentalist Christian, a self-styled Christian therapist, whose psychiatric practice is completely based on biblical principles, and I asked him if he would be interested in reading a book I had discovered that has been helpful to me in understanding how I came to believe in God.  The name of the book is THE TAO OF PHYSICS, a book on the nature of the differences between Western (European roots) civilization's science with its philosophical base in Aristotlelian logic (deductive reasoning, etc.) and Eastern (Asian roots) civilization's existential philosophy based on intuitive reasoning.  \n\nAfter my experience with the book where physics is put into laymen language instead of mathematical equations, I was able, for the first time in my life, to understand the nature of the universe/reality, with the result that simply put my Faith in God onto firmer ground.  At the time (I was about 22 years old at the time and very confused/dysfunctional), I was in desperate spiritual need to understand my faith, or my despair, and the contradictions I had experienced in society and its religions.  This book had served to strengthen my faith by clarifying for me that Western Science and Eastern Philosophy are running to the same goals but coming from opposite ends of the intellectual spectrum.  Western logic/reasoning is at odds with intuition/illogic.  Through its explanation of the physics involved in how the universe operates (a universal truth that Eastern philosophers have understood for thousands of years prior to Western civilization and its deductive reasoning), I was able to understand the impossibility of God is quite possible, and that the universe is such an elegant phenomenon that it must be the creation of some larger phenomenon.  It is a completely closed system of both intuitive chaos and logic that, because of this very duality in its nature must be constituted by a higher power, something larger, more powerful, more inclusive than itself.\n\nNow, back to the issue of my father's response to the book.  He would not even put it in his hands though I told him how much it had helped me understand my faith.  I had thought it would help him in his own struggle, but he told me that his belief forbids him to even touch the fabric of the book, much less read it.  All I can say is that it is that kind of closeminded thinking that really frightens me because that kind of religious zealotry founds the very history of Christianity (the Inquisition, the slaughter of the Crusades) as well as the other fundamentalist (Islamic Jihad as interpreted by fundamentalist Muslims) religions in the world, Islam included, where God not only excuses murder and distruction in His/Her name, but actually rewards it.  These people are dangerous because they are forbidden to listen to the truth when it is put before them.  They are exclusive rather than inclusive in their religiousity, and that is not the same thing as being religious or spiritual, to say the least.\n\nOver the years (I am 57 now.) of my seperation from my father and his faith, I have come to realize that these people's reactions come from their fear that their faith may be explained away as false beliefs, and that they cannot afford emotionally or spiritually to put it to the test in the real world.  But, it also uncovers very clearly the ultimate despair with their own beliefs because they demonstrate by that refusal to learn from the world that they believe that it is possible for their God not to be the perfect and all powerful entity to whom they have given their very lives.  On top of that, add to it, if you will, their own fear of personal failure coming from their very distinctive definition of man's nature as a fallen creature.  This is the basis of those believers saying that the world could and would deceive them.\n\nGod&
452459
I disbelieve on the grounds of lack of evidence so short of proof being forthcoming I couldn't say I believed God existed. Convictions or subjective opinions don't come into it-it's purely down to a lack of valid evidence.
572878
Interesting website, but I'm a Hindu and this website is definately just a "Christianity is wrong" website. It's concept of God is limited in its perspective and it doesn't seem to bother to look further into the vast landscape of religious, philosophical, theological, and spiritual diversity that exists. The site seems to be aimed at trying to convince Christians that what they believe is wrong (which seems very similar to how many Christians try to convert people by trying to convince them what what they believe is right). So, for me, the website wasn't of any real interest.\n\nI do have a complaint about the website. It loads its pages too slow (and I'm on DSL!). Not sure why it was moving so slow, but it took me a while to even read through the website. Whoever maintains the website should look into this or contact their host. \n\nOther than that I am sure that the website is of interest to those who would already agree with it. Otherwise I seriously doubt many Christians would take it very seriously and the website isn't speaking to people of other religions (it seems not to even acknowledge the larger more diverse concepts of God, religion, etc). \n\nThanks for sharing the website.\n\nPeace be with you.
503210
I consider myself an atheist and a Buddhist. I read Batchelor's book a few years ago. It wasn't bad. My favorites:\n\nThe Dhammapada, translated by Easwaran\nhttp://www.amazon.com/Dhammapada-Eknath-Easwaran/dp/0915132370/\n\nThe translation and introduction are terrific. Also:\n\nMindfulness in Plain English by Bhante Gunaratana\nhttp://www.amazon.com/Mindfulness-Plain-English-Updated-Expanded/dp/0861713214/\n\nWhich can also be found online for free:\nhttp://www.budsas.org/ebud/mfneng/mind0.htm\nhttp://www.urbandharma.org/udharma4/mpe.html\nhttp://www.enabling.org/ia/vipassana/Archive/G/Gunaratana/MindfulnessIPE/index.html\n\nBuddhism can be viewed as a secular philosophy or psychology, so I agree that it's perfectly compatible with atheism/agnosticism.
592264
I took a class my freshman year in college called "Early Christian Writings"......Jesus the man did exist.....historically .....there is proof of it......but many things do not fall in line the way the Bible and Christian Theoligans would like to believe or preach.  E.g. he was born 6 BC.....six years than earlier thought...which would make this year...1991?.....Also..he was very open minded.....the missing years of his life when everyone else would like to believe he was making chairs in his father's workshop....he was in the east studying eastern religions.....which is why he is so openminded.   A lot of things he said were not his words originally.   E.g.  His Sermon on the Mount was a direct quotation from Moses.......from the first five books of the bible.....this was how "The Word" was passed down in those times....orally......teachers would walk around....and his students...or "disciples" would follow him as he recited these verses.   When people asked him "are you the son of God?"....he was like...."hello McFly???? we are all the sons of God"........so they killed him.....just because he wasn't a hyprocrite.....do I think he was the Son of God?....of course....we are all...just look around you....do I think he performed miracles?......yes!!! anything is possible through God......and I believe he is the same God for everyone...just called different names....Allah, God....etc...Does God exist???is there proof??? it depends on what you believe is proof....proof has many dimensions.......and I believe faith to be one of them...you can be an Atheist....but It feels so much better to believe in something....
52099
This is a compelling argument against the existence of god. \n\nThe faithful always say that if you were walking along a beach and found a watch, you would presume that it was crafted by a watchmaker. Anything as complex as a watch could not just appear. They look at the universe, more complex than a watch and say that this is evidence of a "watchmaker." \n\nHowever, this argument just pushes the question of creation up a level. Who crafted the watchmaker? Who crafted the watchmaker's watchmaker? It goes on and on ad infinitum.\n\nThe faithful will then say that god needeth not a creator! \n\nWhat? Then why does the universe need one? "Because it's so complex," they'll say.\n\nBut isn't god more complex than the universe? The circle goes on and on.
492228
Yes, I read it and found it very interesting.  The reader should keep in mind, though, that the author does not claim to be anything but human, that is, he does not claim to be God made manifest in a human form like Moses, Jesus Christ, Mohammed, The Bab, and Baha'u'llah.  Therefore, his interpretation of what God is revealing to him is subject to error.  Only the Manifestations of God are perfect and flawless.  Even the highest saint is still human and subject to error.\n\nwww.bahai.org
611614
"Post-Modernism" says that nobody can know everything; therefore, nobody can be absolutely sure about anything; therefore, nobody can be called 'wrong.'\n\nReality says that some things are, and somethings are not, no matter how much you wish they were otherwise.\n\nTake the often-tossed-about question "Does God exist?"  It is ridiculous to say that God may exist for you if you think so, and He doesn't exist for me because I do not think so, but I have heard people make essentially that claim.  I had somebody e-mail me, stating that she didn't believe in God because she didn't like the thought of somebody looking over her; just because she didn't like it doesn't influence reality.\n\nIt was said long ago, "Most people would rather die than think, and in fact they usually do so."
605863
"If God is good and all-powerful, why does evil exist in this world?"\n\nTime to bust out the big words:  Theodicy.\n\nTheodicy:  "an explanation for the presence of evil and suffering that is consistent with the nature and character of God."\n\nBoy, I'm not sure where to start.  There's so many points to make and I'm not sure how to organize my thoughts....but here goes nothing.  This is my theodicy:\n---------------------------------------------------------\nFirst, let's start by defining "evil."  Evil is not a force or a created thing, so it would be faulty to use the circular logic that either God created evil (meaning God isn't good) or that God isn't the Creator of everything (since He didn't create evil).\n\nEvil is the absence of good, much like rust on a car.  God, by giving us free will, allowed us to "create" evil by choosing against Him.  For, if God is good, then to choose against Him would by evil and the consequences would be death (since God gives life).  Just as darkness is the absence of light, so evil is the absence of good.\n\nSometimes evil is the perversion of good.  Cancer is a good non-moral example.  It's a harmful mutation of otherwise healthy cells.  Whether evil twists good or flat-out rejects it, the results are the same.\n\nEvil is not God's fault.  He created only good and we distorted it, which is evil.\n\nEnough on this topic.  I'm leaving a few loose ends and there's much more to say on this, but I would be getting off track.\n\nSecond, let's point out a major implication of the question.  Anyone who asks our topic question for today is demonstrating the influence of Christianity on western thinking.  Hindus don't ask this question.  Animists don't grapple with it.  To them, the gods themselves are evil and corrupt and evil is to be an expected, embraced part of this world.  Suck it up and live with it.  It's the ying and the yang.  The Dark Side and the Light Side of the Force.  It's still the same Force.\n\nBut by asking the question, you are saying that there is a definite "evil" in this world that can be defined and identified.  There's something wrong and not right.  There is injustice.  And you presume that whoever this God fellow is, it's supposed to be His job to oppose this stuff and He's doing a lousy job.\n\nThis is a Christian worldview:  that evil is not normal and should be opposed.  The Red Cross, Salvation Army, etc. are Christian influences in our society.  There is something in us as human beings that desires to fight injustice, help the suffering, etc.  This would make sense if we are made in God's image... but I'm getting off track again.  Let's move to the third point.\n\nThe question is usually vague and impersonal.  What I mean is that people who ask this question usually have in mind for God to go over and fix that mess in Iraq, or do something about sweat shops and child labor in China.  Why doesn't He oppose child pornography, or hold to account genocide in Africa?\n\nBut they don't want God to interfere with the sin and evil in their own hearts and lives.\n\nSee, for God to come in judgment, He would have to be fully just and judge all...  and this brings me to my final point.\n\nThe question neglects another key element of God's character.  Yes, He is good.  Yes, He is omnipotent.  But He is also merciful.  This may seem like a contradiction (i.e., why would He then allow suffering?), but let me explain.\n\nGod holds back His judgment with patient love in order to give us time to repent and be set right.  The painful side of this is that we also then have more time choose evil.  But the day will come when He will judge the earth.  The sweat shop owners will be held to account...and so will you and I.  God is good.  He is perfect, holy, and righteous.  He is pure.  He opposes evil.  We all have evil in our lives:  the t
657340
I enjoyed reading his stuff years ago when I was questioning Christianity and decided that the concept made a lot of sense -- we're rewarded for our good deeds in the next life and are condemned to suffer the same results in our next life that we caused others to suffer in this life.\nThat remained my philosophy of life until I recently found Judaism which is even more logical, doesn't involve mysticism, and doesn't require "belief" in any miracles.