Looking for arguments for the existence of God (moral, atheist)

[Rorschach]

Hi

I am looking for rational intellectual arguments for the existence of God, and why a particular religion is true. Why I am looking for this? Because so far I haven't found any, and I want to seek out arguments that opposes my present intellectual conclusion.

So..

How do you know your religion is right concerning what it states to be true about the universe? On what ground did you come to the conclusion that your religious explanation was the most plausible one as opposed to other religions' explanations or atheism?

[methylatedghosts]

This depends on what you consider God to be! If you can tell me what you think God is I will tell you whether or not I could argue for it's existence.

By the way, welcome to the forums! Throw us an intro thread to tell us a little about yourself!

[Rorschach]

I am an atheist. I am having bigger and bigger problems with understanding how anyone intelligent and educated can believe in for example (taking mainstream Christianity) a supernatural superpowerful entity simultaneously monitoring over 6 billion people's actions and thoughts, caring what these 6,6 billion people do and think, and compare it to his own 10 moral commandements. How do you arrive at the conclusion that this is the most plausible explanation for everything around you?

I am not trying to insult anyone, the point is that I seriously don't understand what arguments convinced religious intellectuals to believe in one of the organized religions.

[nutshell]

Sometime you just know stuff.

For example, I'm assuming you know what salt tastes like, but can you explain how you know?

[Rorschach]

I am a biological psychology student so I got a reasonably good understanding of the sense of gustation from several different perspectives. Your reply clearifies nothing with regard to my original question.

[methylatedghosts]

I am an atheist. I am having bigger and bigger problems with understanding how anyone intelligent and educated can believe in for example (taking mainstream Christianity) a supernatural superpowerful entity simultaneously monitoring over 6 billion people's actions and thoughts, caring what these 6,6 billion people do and think, and compare it to his own 10 moral commandements. How do you arrive at the conclusion that this is the most plausible explanation for everything around you?

I am not trying to insult anyone, the point is that I seriously don't understand what arguments convinced religious intellectuals to believe in one of the organized religions.

Ok, this god you have outlined - the Christian god - is not what I believe in. In that god I see only some truth. The (god/unity/universe/that-which-is) I am a-part of requires a whole different view. I'm pretty sure it's logical and consistent and I am always learning about it.

But to answer your question - why people believe in a Christian God - that's because it rings true for them. It's what makes sense for those people. It adds value, hope, and a variety of other things to their lives which they feel they may not have without it. We all have different ways of doing that and this is one of them.

[Rorschach]

These "arguments" you mention, strictly speaking, do not constitute rational arguments for the truthness of the factual claims of Christianity. They are explanations for why people believe in religions, but are of no concern to the debate over the truth of said claims.

Ex:
"I feel better with myself/it gives me hope if I believe in astrology". This is not an argument for the validity of astrology.

This is why I posted the question. I would like to understand how skeptic, rational, educated people can believe in religious claims.

[methylatedghosts]

No they're not. But your question was "how skeptic, rational, educated people can believe in religious claims." and I think this is how.

Rationality and being religious are not necessarily mutually exclusive.

[Rorschach]

I am sorry if my topic question was unclear, but the intention for this post is to gain an understanding of the arguments that convinces intellectual people into believing religious claims about the world to be true.

So to clearify what this topic is not meant to be about:
It is not ment to be about explanations for religious belief as a human phenomenon.

[methylatedghosts]

Early instillment at a young age.
That and things like "coincidences" that people want to attach meaning to and this personal experience strengthens their personal argument for god.
Some people also have personal experiences of God - which in my book is enough reason.

If you've seen something and interacted with it, then what reason do you have to believe it doesn't exist?

Explanations for religious belief as human phenomena vs. arguments for god that convince people are not necessarily so different. I think there is some overlap