Christians, what is your VERY BEST arguments for the existence of God?

[RedFish]

But surely altruism can be demonstrated towards any life form, not just man, therefore mans idea of 'society' is not necessary for an altruistic act to take place.?
e.g. While fishing during last winter, I found myself accompanied by a swan. I gave it bread, crushed hempseed and maggots to eat, leaving myself short of bait. Not huge on the scale of altruistic acts, I grant you, but human society/community will not benefit from it. One swan is almost indistinguishable from another, at least to me. In return I got bit. Where is human society/community going to benefit from that?

[tackattack]

man's idea of society is moot. I said community. that could be a farmer and his pigs, a hippie commune or a planetfull of people. From the earliest of days I don't see altruism coing before the forming of communal living. By definition, altruism requires a community. You definition of community can shift to whatever you want to commune with, but it comes before altruism in a timeline.

[RedFish]

I get it. I was 'communing' with nature. Doh.

[Godscreated]

theVOID I do not have time to write a reply on this but I will as soon as possible.

[The_Flying_Skeptic]

3-It also brought weapons, stronger diseases, waste, pollution, overpopulation, etc. You're only looking at the good of science and none of the bad. You're also only looking at the bad of religion and not the good...I thought you were more openminded than that.
To answer your 2 questions
a-God provides for us
b-Once again you're assuming religion excludes science. While the inverse is true, Religion doesn't profess to have an answer for all knowledge of the world, just it's origins and ways to better it.

'science' doesn't pollute or overpopulate. you pollute and have too many kids. what do you want people to do? stop driving? stop wanting electricity? do you want to go back to the times that only 1 in 5 babies survived birth? do you want to go back to the times when a new flu virus would wipe out half our population? God doesn't provide for anyone: we provide for ourselves. Religion is not an answer to the origins of the universe, it's a 'just so' story. Get a grip of reality. Think about what you're saying the next time you go to the dentist.

religion does exclude science but that doesn't mean that religious people can't be scientific about certain things (e.g. a theist that studies meteorology).

[tackattack]

Exactly how does belief in a diety exclude science in any way? Your thinking is fundamentally backassward.
perople use science to explain what they don't understand->
science tests and proves and gains understaning of the natural wrld->
people then want to control nature and turn to science->
science creates technology->
technology removes us from the natual world. I think the world would be a much better place without nuclear waste, pollution, guns, television, the internet, etc. I'm not saying these things aren't useful in today's society, but from a naturalistic standpoint yes I'd prefer it if people stopped driving, electricity, etc. If you use occam's razor to find the simplest solution heuristically; then, what's the best way to live? solve that one.

[The_Flying_Skeptic]

Exactly how does belief in a diety exclude science in any way? Your thinking is fundamentally backassward.
perople use science to explain what they don't understand->
science tests and proves and gains understaning of the natural wrld->
people then want to control nature and turn to science->
science creates technology->
technology removes us from the natual world. I think the world would be a much better place without nuclear waste, pollution, guns, television, the internet, etc. I'm not saying these things aren't useful in today's society, but from a naturalistic standpoint yes I'd prefer it if people stopped driving, electricity, etc. If you use occam's razor to find the simplest solution heuristically; then, what's the best way to live? solve that one.

A lot of the ideas in Christianity, for example, completely ignore methodological naturalism (science). I'm not saying that Christians can't practice science. Francis Collins is a Christian evolutionist, geneticist with a big role in the Human Genome Project. I disagree that his basis for being Christian are scientific, but he has made significant contributions to human knowledge that I nobody should discredit for his irrational beliefs.

Your politics on electrical consumerism would be a tough fit unless we find out that we 'have' to give up all these electrical commodities.

Occam's razor? I don't see Occam's razor being used to understand why we should or shouldn't consume electricity... Computers have simplified communication greatly, but have also created an excuse not to go out and talk to people in person where I would agree with you.

[fr0d0]

Francis Collins made this

[Autumnlicious]

Francis Collins made this

He is your dad? The resemblance is striking.

[chatpilot]

All things in science or technology and even in religion can be used either for the betterment or the detriment of a society as a whole. It's not just the beliefs but the ones who hold those beliefs that make the difference for better or for worse. This goes back to the well known quote by the NRA: "Guns don't kill people, people kill people".