The Case for Theism

[median]

There is a reason most sane lucid adults who don't believe in Fairies, Santa Claus, Invisible pink elephants do believe in a Creator of the universe and humans. It's not just because folks are brought up to believe in the existence of God, there are plenty of beliefs folks are taught as children that they later reject. It's because in part it's the best explanation for why we find ourselves alive and in a universe that allows our existence.

An argument from ignorance is the best explanation? NO.

Theism to me is a belief and an opinion, I don't claim it's a fact. It's an opinion regarding the most basic philosophical questions people have asked.

So you have chosen to base your entire life upon just an opinion (a hunch) then? You apologists certainly don't treat your theism like an opinion. You hold your "faith" tightly, fixed, and rigid, and defend it as if it's fact. Do you think the resurrection is "most probably true"? Is it just your opinion that Jesus is the son of God? How are you distinguishing belief and opinion here b/c this certainly sounds like the equivocation fallacy. Also, why are you basing your entire life choices upon an opinion, as opposed to something that you are certain is true?

Regardless of which definition atheists prefer you can ask anyone who calls them self an atheist do you believe we owe the existence of the universe and human life to a personal transcendent Creator of great power and invariably they answer no. They don't merely lack belief that a transcendent Creator of great power caused the universe and humans to exist, they don't believe such was the case.

Do you understand the different between not believing something is true, and believing something is false?? Claims to belief and claims to knowledge are quite different. As an agnostic atheist, I do not hold (or have) a belief in a deity (as 'theism' is the BELIEF in a God). And I also do not have knowledge of a God (i.e. - I do not claim to know there is one). This would be the same for unicorns, fairies, or Santa Claus.

And yes, I do maintain that religious belief is Santa Claus for grown ups. When we don't know something, we should admit it. And when we don't have sufficient evidence to support something we should, at the very least, suspend judgement instead of practicing credulity.

There are two primary reasons I am a theist. First because there are facts (evidence) that supports that belief.

I would actually maintain that this is entirely false. I have never had an experience with a theist (of any kind - and I have met a lot) who actually, honestly, and truly believes in their alleged deity for the primary reason that "there are facts that support that belief". No, instead it is overwhelmingly the case that the religious believer ASSUMED their particular holy book was "the word of God" - because someone else 'sold' them the idea, they then claimed to have some subjective personal experience (which cannot be demonstrated or affirmed), and THEN they started looking for arguments to support their already firmly held belief.

Secondly if I were to reject the belief that God created the universe and humans I would have to be persuaded that mindless lifeless forces somehow coughed a universe into existence and without plan or intent caused the right conditions for life to occur. I'd have to believe that life and mind without plan or intent emerged from something totally unlike itself, mindless lifeless forces.

This argument commits the fallacy of a false dichotomy. You are acting as if there are ONLY two options, when in fact there are more. If you stopped believing in your Yahweh deity, why would you then think that the ONLY other option would be to believe firmly (like you believe now) in "mindless lifeless forces"?? Why couldn't you simply admit that you DON'T KNOW???? It always puzzles me why you people are SO set on, "I HAVE TO KNOW RIGHT NOW!!" It's absurd.

I know most atheists prefer we just reject God first and then take it on faith that that our existence was caused by naturalistic forces that didn't intend our existence and that the universe also just came into existence for no particular reason. We should just assume that natural forces did it somehow. I'll leave it to atheists to persuade me such did happen or such could happen. After all we're not supposed to just take things on faith.

This is 100% false (likely b/c you are attempting to define "faith" in a way that is extremely vague and unimpressive - and also b/c this is NOT at all what we unbelievers do). I do not "have faith" in anything. Reasonable expectations based on evidence is NOT faith. For one, b/c faith is rigid, fixed, and held to strongly - whereas reasonably trusting the evidence is tentative and easily changeable. Is your faith in Jesus, or God, or Yahweh, or whatever, easily changeable?

One of the chief objections to theism cited by atheists is they claim there is no evidence in favor of theism. I am often re-assured that they are very open minded and would be happy to evaluate any such evidence if there was any. I agree that if indeed there is no evidence in favor of a claim that is a valid reason to decline belief in such a claim (although it by no means disproves such a claim). There is often confusion about what evidence is and what proof is. Evidence are facts or objects that support a conclusion. For example, a knife in the back of the deceased is evidence that supports the conclusion the deceased was murdered. Typically the knife and pictures of the knife in the back of the deceased would be entered into evidence. A lot of evidence is circumstantial evidence.

Actually, the more precise way of putting this is that there is no GOOD/SOUND evidence for theism (there is no extraordinary evidence). Indeed, anybody can use almost anything as 'evidence' for anything (just as lightening used to be called 'evidence' for Zeus). Big whoop. As your alleged 'evidence' below shows (the universe? really?) you are really grasping b/c you have no real extraordinary evidence.

Here's a test: If a salesman came to your door, claiming to have a 'magic' product that would "cure all your sicknesses and ailments instantly" but his only evidence was "I have this bottle. It's in here" would you believe his 'evidence' and buy his magic potion juice with your life savings? This is why we don't buy your claim to theism (not to mention the fact that you haven't provided any coherent definition of what the word "God" means).

I will present several lines of evidence that support the belief in theism. They don't prove theism is true, they merely provide good reason to think it's true. I'm not going to be making any 'God of the gaps' arguments nor am I going to offer any hypothetical scenarios or cite the mere possibility of something being true as evidence theism is true.

The first line of evidence is.

1. The fact the universe exists

That might seem like a paltry fact in support of theism. Suppose I was trying a case for murder, the first line of evidence I would produce is a dead body. After all, I couldn't accuse anyone of murder if there was no one deceased. If the universe didn't exist there would be no reason to invoke the existence of God. Moreover if a universe didn't exist there would in fact be as atheists claim no evidence God exists. In order for anyone to even think God exists a place for humans to exist must exist. There are certain facts that must be true for anyone to think God exists. For humans to have any reason to think God might exist, we must have a place that allows us to live. There are in fact several facts and conditions that must be true in order for there to be any reason to think the existence of a Creator is true. None of those facts needs to be true for atheism to be true. Atheism doesn't require the existence of a universe to believe atheism is true. If the universe didn't exist atheism might still be false (God might exist but not have created the universe) but there would be no evidentiary reason to raise the existence of God. Additional lines of evidence soon to follow...

First, you have a misconception as to what atheism is. Atheism is simply a lack of belief in a God. Just like theism is the BELIEF in a God. So theism and atheism have to do with belief. That is all. Therefore, there is no burden of proof for atheism - just like there is no burden of proof on you if I claim to have a flying pet fire-breathing dragon in my backyard.

Second, you're right. "The fact that the universe exists" is certainly looking faulty. It is NOT (in any way) a good reason for thinking your alleged God exists. Are you willing to be consistent and say that the fact of anything existing can be used to support any mythical thing existing? If not, why not? If so, then why think your argument is any better? This just sounds like gullibility.

So, your 'reasons' for thinking there is a God (whatever the heck that term is supposed to mean) are not just terrible. They are credulous. You WANT to believe b/c of either your fear of death, fear of the unknown, desperation to 'just know' how we got here, etc. And those psychological motivations are stopping you from being rational and consistent.