Q: do you, Christian, claim that God exists, rather than you believe that he exists?

[fr0d0]

Given God, yes. Not to the exclusion of any other preposition, as seems to be the case complainants are making.

[Bad Writer]

In other words, "IF god was a given..." I'm picking up what you're putting down.

[fr0d0]

lol Yes, if you like.

[discipulus]

An atheist doesn't actually have to be a believer in science. An atheist merely rejects faith in God. They don't even really need an alternative explanation in order to reject another, for example:

I agree. You can reject the "God" explanation without having an alternative explanation.

I walk out of my front door one morning to discover a newly planted apple tree sapling. It wasn't there when I last looked the previous evening. As I am standing there puzzling over its origin a neighbour leans out of his window and says:

"See that. Pixies did it last night - they woke me up. Bloody pixies."

With that he closes the window.

I do not know where the Apple tree came from. Should I therefore accept the pixie explanation?

No. You should not accept the supernatural explanation if there is a natural explanation that best explains the existence of the apple tree. If I saw an apple tree in my front yard and it was not there previously, I would think the best explanation would be that someone planted it there while I was asleep!

Atheists are nihilists:

For me I'd answer kinda yes, kinda no on this. I see no grand plan. I see no evidence that there is anything other than this life. There's no point, as such.

The strange things is that I find that thought liberating. The idea that there is a point to my life given to me by a third party I find demeaning.

max-greece, I want to thank you for being completely transparent and honest here. This remark here is what I think the whole issue is really all about. I think, from speaking with various atheists, that the real appeal of atheism is this "liberation" you speak of. I think this is what lies at the heart of it all. I have imagined it many times before in my own mind, how it must feel to be an atheist. I could imagine that when one comes to that point, they must feel as if a huge burden has been lifted from their shoulders. To believe that you are the master of your own life, to believe that there is no one above you, greater than you who knows your every thought, who sees your every act, and to believe that you will not be judged for the things you have done must indeed in a sense be liberating.

That idea of liberation is what Russell hinted at in his "A Free Man's Worship". It is also something Thomas Nagel alluded to in his quote which reads:

“I want atheism to be true and am made uneasy by the fact that some of the most intelligent and well-informed people I know are religious believers. It isn’t just that I don’t believe in God and, naturally, hope that I’m right in my belief. It’s that I hope there is no God! I don’t want there to be a God; I don’t want the universe to be like that.” - Thomas Nagel

In fact, this liberation is something Aldous Huxley yearned for:

‘I had motive for not wanting the world to have a meaning; consequently assumed that it had none, and was able without any difficulty to find satisfying reasons for this assumption. The philosopher who finds no meaning in the world is not concerned exclusively with a problem in pure metaphysics, he is also concerned to prove that there is no valid reason why he personally should not do as he wants to do, or why his friends should not seize political power and govern in the way that they find most advantageous to themselves. … For myself, the philosophy of meaninglessness was essentially an instrument of liberation, sexual and political.’ - Aldous Huxley

So max-greece, you definitely are not alone when it comes to believing in this liberation that you believe atheism affords you.

Obviously the side point to the above is why an all powerful, universe creating God needs or wants our praise in the first place?

God does not need our praise. God exists wholly independently of us and needs nothing from us. Does God want our praise?

This article may be of some benefit:

Why Would God Want Us to Praise Him?

I was recently asked why God would want us to praise and worship Him. This is a question I hear every so often since we immediately assume that a person who demands praise is a pompous big-head. I think there are many Christians out there who secretly wonder about this—afraid to ask the question (lest they be thought unspiritual), but bothered all the same.

God is completely self-sufficient and doesn't need our praise and worship. However, He does deserve it. Would you agree that it is right and good to praise someone who is worthy of praise? We instinctively know this and praise people for all sorts of achievements. We praise the people we love and admire, and it's not right or good for us to withhold praise from them.

We all understand the concept of praise being due certain people. Imagine that you crafted an incredibly beautiful sculpture and won a prestigious award for your creation; but when the time came for the award ceremony, they gave the prize for your sculpture to the wrong artist! That would not be just, right, or good. In the same way, God—as the only being perfect in goodness, justice, love, etc.—is worthy of our praise. We do, in fact, owe Him that praise. He wants us to praise Him because it is right and good for us to do so. Since God wants us to do right and good things, of course he wants us to praise and worship Him.

Beyond the praise being right and good (and because of its being right and good), worshiping God also brings us joy and enhances our relationship with Him. We see this in human relationships as well—think of a man with his wife. Doesn’t it bring him great joy to praise her?

Here's how C.S. Lewis puts it in Reflections on the Psalms:

I had never noticed that all enjoyment spontaneously overflows into praise…. The world rings with praise—lovers praising their mistresses, readers their favourite poet, walkers praising the countryside, players praising their favourite game…. I had not noticed either that just as men spontaneously praise whatever they value, so they spontaneously urge us to join them in praising it: 'Isn't she lovely? Wasn't it glorious? Don't you think that magnificent?' The Psalmists in telling everyone to praise God are doing what all men do when they speak of what they care about. My whole, more general, difficulty about the praise of God depended on my absurdly denying to us, as regards the supremely Valuable, what we delight to do, what indeed we can't help doing, about everything else we value. I think we delight to praise what we enjoy because the praise not merely expresses but completes the enjoyment; it is its appointed consummation. It is not out of compliment that lovers keep on telling one another how beautiful they are; the delight is incomplete till it is expressed.

Finally, God created us for His pleasure (just as we create delightful things for our pleasure). Praising God—acknowledging His goodness, love, perfection, and all the incredible things He has done for us—brings Him pleasure. If you have children, you know what a beautiful thing it is to have them praise you. You also know the pain of having them selfishly take you for granted and ignore you. When that happens, neither you nor your children are enriched, and your relationship is strained. In the same way, the right response from us toward God is praise because He deserves it. When we act out our love and acknowledgment of Him in this way, we fulfill our purpose; and when we are rightly fulfilling our purpose, we have the best possible joy—God is pleased, our relationship with Him is enhanced, and He has rightly received what He deserves. Luckily, this is not a difficult command to follow, for when we truly love Him, our praise will flow naturally from that love.

- See more at: http://str.typepad.com/weblog/2012/01/wh...yUfoU.dpuf

Whilst there may be truths in any religious book that in and of itself proves nothing as to its origin.

I agree. However, I do not think any Christian here has argued that because the Bible contains some truth in it therefore it is inspired by God.

Where, however, there are obvious, factual errors in that book I would argue it does indeed prove its origin to be, at least, not that of an omniscient, moral God.

I challenge you to provide one factual error that is uncontestable and clearly an instance where the Bible contradicts what we know beyond a reasonable doubt to be true.

[Bad Writer]

The global flood. It contradicts the earth. Thanks for playing.

[max-greece]

Oh BW really.....that was my line.

Oh - I'd go for for the destruction of Tyre I suppose, if the flood is already taken.

OR the story of Adam and Eve.

Or the story of the creation.

Hundreds more I am sure...

[Bad Writer]

I saw this post while I was out shopping with my wife. We spent the rest of the time there going over what else in the Bible contradicts reality. The list got a bit extensive. Talking donkeys and snakes was up there on our list of laughs. The flood comment is the one I ended up posting.

[Angrboda]

Still waiting on disciplus' followup to his question "are you human." That went nowhere fast.

[Ryantology]

That will not be hard.

I do not believe in Allah or Zeus or any other god because I have no good reasons to believe in them.

That's actually a good answer, or would be if you didn't make a special exception that you apparently refuse to justify, and it's why we don't believe in yours. There are no good reasons to do so.

That said, what reason do you have for believing in your god that couldn't apply to any other god?

[Rampant.A.I.]

We've been down this road many times. So far no theist has made a convincing demonstration that the mere existence of the universe is evidence for anything but its mere existence.

Given God the creator, creation is all the evidence we need of his intervention. Nothing further needs to be said or done. That statement is complete.

The "givens" you're asking for here:
<The universe was created by a conscious entity>
<That entity is my Religion's God>
<God exists>
<That God is my Religion's God>
<The universe is intelligently designed>
<God created the universe>
<God created everything in the universe>

Further proof of anything about anything is redundant conjecture.

It would be, if you were speaking to contemporaries who assumed all of the conclusions listed above were "given", for the sake of argument building on those conclusions as premises.

However, you've been asked to provide arguments to support the above conclusions before you can introduce them as premises and show the conclusion <My God is the creator> you introduced as self-supporting.

That conclusion is only self-evident to people who believe it to be: And belief is not logical support.