• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Is it reasonable to believe in God just because God exists?

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
The underlying assumption is that one believes in God because there is evidence for God.

Is it reasonable to believe in God if one does not like God?
Is it reasonable to believe in God because one fears God?
Is it reasonable to serve God out of duty if one does not like God?

What do you think? Are any of these reasonable?

If you think they are reasonable, why do you think so?

If you think they are unreasonable, why do you think so?
 
Last edited:

Bthoth

A Conscious and Capable, Pantheist
The underlying assumption is that one knows that God exists because there is evidence for God.

Is it reasonable to believe in God if one does not like God?
Is it reasonable to believe in God because one fears God?
Is it reasonable to serve God out of duty if one does not like God?

What do you think? Are any of these reasonable?

If you think they are reasonable, why do you think so?

If you think they are unreasonable, why do you think so?
Which and what god?

There is evidence that nature itself is god, but not so much for the plethora of the other gods.
 

danieldemol

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
The Abrahamic God who is All-Powerful, All-Knowing, and All-Wise.
To be reasonable the underlying premises would have to be demonstrably sound in my view.

In this case presumably the underlying premise is that there is reliable (as opposed to fabricated or misunderstood) evidence that the God referred to exists and can be demonstrated.

If you feel that underlying premise is demonstrably sound then demonstrate away in my view.
 

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
God exists because there is evidence for God.

I don't believe there is any evidence for a god. So the op questions are unreasonable.

If anyone had evidence that was compelling that person would have the worlds top clergy on their speed dial, would be world famous and able to command their own price for interviews.

As yes such success has never happened
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
To be reasonable the underlying premises would have to be demonstrably sound in my view.

In this case presumably the underlying premise is that there is reliable (as opposed to fabricated or misunderstood) evidence that the God referred to exists and can be demonstrated.

If you feel that underlying premise is demonstrably sound then demonstrate away in my view.
I originally said:
"The underlying assumption is that one knows that God exists because there is evidence for God."

In order to be more consistent with my questions, I just edited my OP to say:
"The underlying assumption is that one believes in God because there is evidence for God."

The assumption (not premise) was required because belief in God is the basis for the questions I asked.
In order to answer the questions you have to assume that the person believes in God because they have evidence for God.

The purpose of this thread is not to demonstrate that God exists. That can never be demonstrated.
This thread is not about evidence for God.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
I don't believe there is any evidence for a god. So the op questions are unreasonable.

If anyone had evidence that was compelling that person would have the worlds top clergy on their speed dial, would be world famous and able to command their own price for interviews.

As yes such success has never happened
This thread is not about what you believe, it is based upon a person who believes in God.
The underlying assumption is that this person believes in God because there is evidence for God.
In order to answer the questions you would have to imagine that you are that person.
If you cannot imagine that then you cannot answer the questions.

Please let's not turn this into another thread about evidence for God. That is not what this thread is about. #7
 

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
This thread is not about what you believe, it is based upon a person who believes in God.
The underlying assumption is that this person believes in God because there is evidence for God.
In order to answer the questions you would have to imagine that you are that person.
If you cannot imagine that then you cannot answer the questions.

Please let's not turn this into another thread about evidence for God. That is not what this thread is about. #7

An assumption that i believe is false so my response to the op was valid.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
An assumption that i believe is false so my response to the op was valid.
You still do not get it do you?
This thread is not about whether you agree with the hypothetical person who believes in God because that person believes there is evidence for God.

The underlying assumption is not that there is evidence for God.
The assumption was only for the purpose of answering the questions I asked in the OP.

Assuming that a person believes in God because that person believes there is evidence for God:

Is it reasonable for that person to believe in God if that person does not like God?
Is it reasonable for that person to believe in God because that person fears God?
Is it reasonable for that person to serve God out of duty if that person does not like God?
 

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
You still do not get it do you?
This thread is not about whether you agree with the hypothetical person who believes in God because that person believes there is evidence for God.

The underlying assumption is not that there is evidence for God.
The assumption was only for the purpose of answering the questions I asked in the OP.

If a person believes in God because that person believes there is evidence for God:

Is it reasonable to believe in God if one does not like God?
Is it reasonable to believe in God because one fears God?
Is it reasonable to serve God out of duty if one does not like God?

Yes and i don't agree, i thought I'd made that clear
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Yes and i don't agree, i thought I'd made that clear
Of course I know that you do not agree that there is evidence for God.
But the underlying assumption is not that there is evidence for God.
The underlying assumption is that a person believes in God because that person believes there is evidence for God:

I was still editing my post to make it clearer but somehow it got posted before I finished. Here is the edited post:

You still do not get it do you?​
This thread is not about whether you agree with the hypothetical person who believes in God because that person believes there is evidence for God.​
The underlying assumption is not that there is evidence for God.​
The assumption was only for the purpose of answering the questions I asked in the OP.​
Assuming that a person believes in God because that person believes there is evidence for God:​
Is it reasonable for that person to believe in God if that person does not like God?​
Is it reasonable for that person to believe in God because that person fears God?​
Is it reasonable for that person to serve God out of duty if that person does not like God?​

I don't think anyone is going to answer my questions, but I know at least one person, @Truthseeker, understands what I am asking.
 
Last edited:

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
Of course I know that you do not agree that there is evidence for God.

I was still editing my post to make it clearer but somehow it got posted before I finished. Here is the edited post:

You still do not get it do you?
This thread is not about whether you agree with the hypothetical person who believes in God because that person believes there is evidence for God.

The underlying assumption is not that there is evidence for God.
The assumption was only for the purpose of answering the questions I asked in the OP.

Assuming that a person believes in God because that person believes there is evidence for God:

Is it reasonable for that person to believe in God if that person does not like God?
Is it reasonable for that person to believe in God because that person fears God?
Is it reasonable for that person to serve God out of duty if that person does not like God?

Right,
Yes i get it, no need to keep repeating your put down. And as I've said , I've made my point clear.
 

danieldemol

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
The purpose of this thread is not to demonstrate that God exists. That can never be demonstrated.
Correct, but this in turn means the underlying assumption is not demonstrably sound - which to me makes it seem not in accordance with reason since if one sticks to reason alone it would seem preferable to adopt demonstrably sound premises.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ppp

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
Yes and i don't agree, i thought I'd made that clear
Now play the game correctly... Some make-believe person believes in what very well could be a make-believe God. This make-believe God wants and expects that make-believe person to love him and obey him and to fear him. So, if that make-believe person believes in that make-believe God, then they should do as that God says. But never should that make-believe person ever not like his make-believe God.

If the make-believe person doesn't like, or even hates, his make-believe God, why serve that God? Just get another make-believe God. There's plenty out there.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Correct, but this in turn means the underlying assumption is not demonstrably sound - which to me makes it seem not in accordance with reason since if one sticks to reason alone it would seem preferable to adopt demonstrably sound premises.
The underlying assumption is not that there is evidence for God.

The underlying assumption is that this person believes in God because that person believes there is evidence for God.


The assumption was only for the purpose of answering the questions I asked in the OP.

Why is this so difficult for people to understand? I used plain English.
 

an anarchist

Your local anarchist.
The underlying assumption is that one believes in God because there is evidence for God.
Well, are we assuming that one believes in God because they believe there is evidence for God. Not because there is evidence for God, right?
The underlying assumption you present is purely hypothetical if it's not that way, as there is no definitive evidence for God. But that's not what this thread is about.
Is it reasonable to believe in God if one does not like God?
Well it can definitely be personal preference, if one believes in God. @Starlight comes to mind.
Liking or not liking god can be wholly irrelevant though when it comes to your personal belief in God. It goes back to what you believe as evidence for God, so liking or not liking god isn't a factor a lot of the times. Though for many people it is. And that's fine.
Is it reasonable to believe in God because one fears God?
No. To fear God one would have to believe in God in the first place. And that depends on how they view the evidence. So it goes back to that again.
Is it reasonable to serve God out of duty if one does not like God?
Again, if you believe in a specific god that requires that of you. It goes back to belief.
What do you think? Are any of these reasonable?

If you think they are reasonable, why do you think so?

If you think they are unreasonable, why do you think so?
I think the examples you raise are moot.

I am failing to see the point?
 
Top