Are there any good books that outline the arguments for and against religion/God's existence?
469192
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.
483179
Yes. In university I had a comparative religions class, and I borrowed a friend's copy a few years back, as well. \n\nI would say the major point of opposition for someone from a Christian background would be the lack of support for the deity of Christ. I think the verse was something like "God was not begotten, nor did he beget."\n\nHowever, even among Christians this issue draws controversy. I believe all the religions of the book teach there will be a judgment day, and God will sort it all out then. \n\nI can wait.
848400
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.
142948
God. This explanation is what everyone eventually resorts to when the other answers fail. Throughout all of human history, we've been trying to explain existence. But nobody has ever succeeded. And it's likely that nobody ever will. So we create the concept of God, whose only necessary property is being "that which explains existence." \n\nThis doesn't tell us much about god, though. It doesn't mean that any particular religion is correct. It merely defines god as something which answers The Question, because we have not been able to.
701803
The idea of 'a god' cannot be disproved.  Because a god doesn't necessarily exist in a physical sense or impact on anything in a measurable way, there's no way it can be shown that one doesn't exist.\nThe Christian/Jewish/Islamic God as described in their holy books can be shown through evidence to not exist, as these religions are wrong about the creation of both the earth and life.  There is scientific evidence to support this, in the theory of evolution by natural selection, the Big Bang, abiogenesis and various other scientific theories which are inconsistent with those religions.
370580
Yes!  www.religiousscience.org \n\nNo guilt, sin, threats of hell.  Just pure appreciation of our creator, for living, and encouragement to make good choices in life.
686916
Every other answer so far is wrong.  To answer this question you have to know the source:\n\nThe term 'agnostic' was coined by Thomas Huxley and it refers quite simply to a person who holds the view that it is wrong to assert the truth of a proposition without logically satisfactory evidence. \n\nSo, an agnostic would say that it's wrong to say "God exists" or "No gods exist" without the argument or evidence to back it up.  Moreover, the agnostic would say that it's immoral for a person to tell someone else that they *ought* to believe in the existence of a god or gods without providing logically satisfactory evidence.\n\nA 'theist' is defined as someone who believes in the existence of a god or gods, so an atheist is anyone who is not a theist.\n\nNote that you can be agnostic and also an atheist, or agnostic and a theist, or not agnostic and an atheist, or not agnostic and a theist.\n\nHope this helps...  :-)
408682
Second question: Just reading Genesis and Exodus (for starters) should send you running for the exit -- the judeo-christian god would appear to be a sadistic psychopath.\n\nFirst question: We know there's no evidence for the existence of a god or gods.  We know there are mountains of evidence -- actually, a cosmos-full of it -- about how the cosmos came into being and how it works; and none of that evidence indicates the existence of a creator or prime mover.\n\nTherefore, those who assert that yes there is a god, are proceeding not from knowledge, but from belief.\n\nSo if you want to KNOW the truth about god's existence and his/her/its nature, the answer is, you can't. But if you wish or choose to BELIEVE in god's existence, why then you can have any god(s) you care to dream up.  \n\nWhich, come to think of it, is exactly what people have done down through the ages.  But such creations have an expiry date; after all, nobody attends the Church of Odin these days.
1143395
Sure... Ta for asking.\n\nI have come to this decision based on my upbringing, education, research, and experience.  I have found no evidence to support the claims outlined by any religion (and I have researched most of them), and infact find stacks of evidence that questions the validity and even the source of all the 'divinely inspired' books.  For me  science has plausible, logical & evidenced based answers to how we have developed by impersonal means.\n\nNatural disasters are impersonal, viruses and diseases kill all the time, and of course people kill people and animals.  Nature has many examples of downright evil design like parasitoids or just plain stupid design like the blind spot in our eye.\n\nA study of history shows the development of religion and it is plain to see how it is borne out of fear of the unknown, and for the main religions they have been spread alot by blood.  I also find the concept of god illogical, and find the holy book versions to be mean and sadistic.\n\nI have never ever witnessed anything I can't explain naturally.\n\nSo quite simply I have nothing to suggest a god exists -so to me it is a non concept up there with santa and the tooth fairy, therefore I am atheist.
503105
Try the following, the first one is the best.  But going to almost guarentee you it isn't going to work.\nhttp://www.whatismormonism.com/\nhttp://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/BOM/index.htm
280080
Yeah Void, you should totally get into religion - it's great! \n\nReasons:\n\n1) You don't have to think for yourself. Truth is all defined in this book and you can switch your brain off for the rest of your life and just coast.\n\n2) Whenever something bad happens you can rationalize it away by telling yourself it's all part of God's master plan. Husband or wife died? No problem! I'm sure God had a reason.\n\n3) You don't actually have to be a good person to be religious. You can be a morally corrupt individual, but so long as you do what the book says and live in fear of being burned alive for an eternity, you'll be fine! Just remember to be a good person out of fear, not because you want to be a good person.\n\n4) If you want to start a war, just make sure that the other 'side' is a different religion from you. That way you'll be doing God's work!\n\n5) You can feel completely justified in pushing your beliefs onto others. Don't worry if they don't like it - you can just go into politics and force it on them!\n\nSo you see, Void, there are plenty of reasons to be religious!
89991
well, there is the Bible, some text in the Islam ,the  Qunram..History I would say. Even if you are an atheist deny the existence of Jesus is just too far :/
880418
Most important, have her learn about all religions, not just Christianity, and not just "live" religions. What's the historical context behind religions -- how were they created and used, and why? What's different between Zeus and the Christian God? Who's right? Why? To paraphrase Richard Dawkins, there are many religions. Everyone's an atheist about every religion but their own, I just take it one God further.\n\nHistory is good. Aristotle, Pythagoras, Galileo, etc. all had wildly varying affects on or from the church. Why is that? What were the arguments that caused Christian fragmentation? What was considered heretical during the Inquisition?\n\nHave her read about interesting scientists, like Feynman's books. Read A Brief History of Time or A Short History of Nearly Everything. Rent Carl Sagan's Cosmos and watch it together.\n\nTalk to her. Have her get used to questioning assumptions, searching for answers, and not taking the intellectually lazy way out. Have her be OK with uncertainty and not knowing something (but wanting to learn it).\n\nTeach her the basic scientific method (observe, hypothesize, test). Explain Occam's Razor. Demonstrate how they work.\n\nLet her play. Let her see that beauty, and magic, and love, and life, and happiness, and goodness, don't require an invisible omniscient all-powerful deity to exist. Teach her that morals don't come from fear of hell, but from respect for others and herself.\n\nAnd, maybe, "accidentally" set http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/ as her browser home page ;-)
490129
Valid point.  At the very best, if proven, any argument for a deity can prove "god".  I use a lower case "g" on purpose.\n\nAll the arguments for god (which, by the way, were derived by Aquinas from the pagan greeks) at best, only prove a deist creator.  None spell out a specific "G"od, much less Yahweh.\n\nThis is all despite the fact that centuries of rational thought have exposed the glaring holes in these arguments.  Nevertheless, as I said, even if they WERE rational arguments, the only "prove" deism, nothing more.\n\nSo we arrive at the same standpoint most people are anyway...is the God Yahweh?  Jesus?  Buddhah?  Allah? Native American Corn God?  Arguments for ID and a creator prove nothing about religion.\n\nJefferson and Paine were both strong deists, who bought every argument these theists could throw down about the existance of God (though great men both, not their strongest positions, in my opinion.)  However, both men abhorred Christianity and theism in general.\n\nArguments for "g"od get you absolutely nothing, and leave people exactly where they were before, choosing their own deity.\n\nThat is why the bible has nothing to do with proving "g"od.
767076
Conversations with God by Neale Donald Walsh\nwonderful book ... and if any book nailed how God would or should be ... this is it
539489
Maybe. And maybe not. The point of religion is that it is based on faith, not knowledge: so proving God exists would actually destroy all possibility of religion, because it would render faith impossible. You can only believe in something that may not exist. Believing in a God whose existence is rationally proved would be like believing in the postman, and THAT would be goofy nonsense.
606386
Hume’s argument:\nEvil exists (Premise 1) \nGod knows it does (Since he knows all) \nHe could prevent it (He can do anything) \nA good being would prevent evil \nIf he could \nSo God cannot be good \nBut if God exists he is good\n\nIt convinces me utterly, along with other aspects of the world and of logic.  I don't mean that god should necessarily prevent every single instance of evil, but thousands of children getting slaughtered (even by god himself as in the OT), misscarriages, stillbirths, anacephalice births, etc... just don't cut it.  Xians either need to accept that he can't possibly have all 3 qualities:\nomniscient\nomnipotent\nomnibenevolent\nor he can't exist at all.  But the trifecta just makes no sense whatsoever.