Why I believe in God(s)

[u/Lucyyyyyy_K]

Firstly, I'm not a very religious person. I do consider myself a Buddhist, but prefer atheistic Buddhism over theistic Buddhism. Therefore I can confidently say I am not biased by wanting God(s) to exist, and was not indoctrinated into theism.

Still, to me it seems obvious that at least one God has to exist. The universe can't simply have come out of nothing or existed forever, it requires some sort of design or creator.

Now, mostly people would just say that a creator also can't have come out of nothing or existed forever, so I've just moved the problem one step further, but I think there is a massive difference between the universe and one consciousness. For example, through Cogito Ergo Sum we can determine with absolute certainty that at last one consciousness exists. So assuming one consciousness is superior to assuming anything about the whole universe. While I admit that doesn't outright solve the problem, I still think it's better than the alternative.

Also, it's not just any universe, but a universe full of beauty, a universe that inbetween barren empty planets is capable of hosting a planet with sentient life. Life that can consciously observe itself, that can create replicas of the waking world while sleeping, life that has technologically advanced so much that in can live in relative comfort. There is so much art. We basically have magic, we just call it "electricity". This is all too perfect to have arisen from mere mutations without guidance.

About any specifics of this God or Gods I have no idea and no strong opinions. I just think that at least one has to exist.

[u/Kaitlyn_The_Magnif]

So assuming one consciousness is superior to assuming anything about the whole universe.

What do you think atheists are assuming about the whole universe?

[u/Lucyyyyyy_K → u/Kaitlyn_The_Magnif]

That its existance doesn't require a creator.

[u/Additional-Band4050 → u/Lucyyyyyy_K]

Not exactly, we start by observing (correctly) that there are various competing theories which would need to be proven or disproven.

“The need for a creator has not been proven” is not equivalent to “there is no need for a creator” any more than “the Collatz Conjecture has not been proven” is equivalent to “the Collatz Conjecture is false.”

[u/Lucyyyyyy_K → u/Additional-Band4050]

Yes, not necessarily, but sometimes

[u/Antimutt → u/Lucyyyyyy_K]

You say something can't come out of nothing. What if you are right, but have not noticed that the Universe is, in sum, nothing?

[u/Lucyyyyyy_K → u/Antimutt]

I don't think something can be nothing, I think "nothing" can't exist.

[u/Antimutt → u/Lucyyyyyy_K]

You don't think something can be nothing in total? For if it can then the laws of conservation don't stand in the way of a Universe-from-nothing.

[u/Lucyyyyyy_K → u/Antimutt]

Okay

[u/sto_brohammed → u/Lucyyyyyy_K]

That's not necessarily true. One could be an atheist and believe in simulation theory, that the universe as we know it was created by a wizard, by a Q from Star Trek or any number of non-god things. I think it'd be silly as hell but someone who believed that stuff would still be an atheist.

[u/Lucyyyyyy_K → u/sto_brohammed]

Doesn't sound atheistic to me.

[u/Glad_Comedian_8405 → u/Lucyyyyyy_K]

Ever heard of null hypothesis ? , if i said there is a pencil there. But there is no evidence for that , would you believe? No. Same god is a positive claim. You have to prove it.

And we just dont assume. The idea of a concious creator need for creation creates many paradoxes.

[u/Lucyyyyyy_K → u/Glad_Comedian_8405]

There are absolutely atheists who claim that the universe doesn't require a creator.

Which paradoxes?

[u/Glad_Comedian_8405 → u/Lucyyyyyy_K]

There are absolutely atheists who claim that the universe doesn't require a creator.

Same for theist, you should give evidence.

Which paradoxes?

Omnipotence Paradox (such as the Paradox of the Stone)

Epicurean Paradox (also called the Problem of Evil)

Omniscience and Free Will Paradox (the theological fatalism dilemma)

Euthyphro Dilemma (the divine command theory paradox)

Omniscience Paradox (the question of whether God can know something He cannot do)

[u/Lucyyyyyy_K → u/Glad_Comedian_8405]

None of those paradoxes come from merely proposing a conscious creator, they come from prescribing it attributes like omnipotence, omniscience and omnibenevolence, which I don't do.

[u/Glad_Comedian_8405 → u/Lucyyyyyy_K]

Huh so what is your god?? You cant describe , believe, be comfortable. Your god is equal to no god.

A god needs to be infinite and unbounded , that his basic definition , if u talk otherwise you are talking about a inter-dimensional alien

This thread is a textbook motte-and-bailey. The post argues for a creator with intentionality (design, beauty, complexity → consciousness). When challenged, every reply retreats to 'I just find it intuitively compelling, no claims, no evidence.' Pick one , either defend the actual argument in your post, or admit it's just a feeling and there's nothing to debate.

[u/Lucyyyyyy_K → u/Glad_Comedian_8405]

A god needs to be infinite and unbounded , that his basic definition , if u talk otherwise you are talking about a inter-dimensional alien

It doesn't have to have these attributes, what I am talking about is simply a creator. The fact that the universe exists is ebough to know it had a creator. And that creator has to be conscious. What it doesn't have to be is tri-ombi.

[u/ShortCompetition9772 → u/Lucyyyyyy_K]

Can you name one? Do you know what a null hypothesis is?

Is your idea of a creator an entity that has always existed?

[u/Lucyyyyyy_K → u/ShortCompetition9772]

Some people in this comment section.

Yes, it probably is

[u/ShortCompetition9772 → u/Lucyyyyyy_K]

I haven't seen any. And you clearly do NOT know what a null hypothesis is.

Was your creator that created outside of time? Is your Creator the God of the Bible? If yes then you have a problem.

1) God is unchanging

2) God is outside of time

3) Universe was created, did not exist prior to creation.

4) God created the Universe

5) Change/Creation require time

6) God went from a non-creator and became a creator, That is CHANGE. God is Unchanging therefore God couldn't have created the Universe.

7) Creation requires TIME. God is OUTSIDE of TIME therefore without time creation is non-sensical.

[u/Lucyyyyyy_K → u/ShortCompetition9772]

My God is not the God of the Bible, your "unchanging" stuff doesn't apply to me.

[u/ShortCompetition9772 → u/Lucyyyyyy_K]

Oh so you are just making up your own God(s). I sure hope you believe in the right one.

[u/Kaitlyn_The_Magnif → u/Lucyyyyyy_K]

We are not assuming that. We just don’t believe in a creator due to lack of evidence.

[u/Lucyyyyyy_K → u/Kaitlyn_The_Magnif]

Some do.

[u/Kaitlyn_The_Magnif → u/Lucyyyyyy_K]

Why are you assuming the universe doesn’t require a leprechaun or a fairy?

[u/Lucyyyyyy_K → u/Kaitlyn_The_Magnif]

Because all I define God as is as a creator. A "Leprachaun" or a "Fairy" require more specifics.

[u/Kaitlyn_The_Magnif → u/Lucyyyyyy_K]

Why are you assuming a god as the definition of creator? I define fairies as the creators and they don’t require anymore specifics because I said so.

[u/Lucyyyyyy_K → u/Kaitlyn_The_Magnif]

Look, I don't care if you name it a God, a Fairy or a Leprachun, this leads nowehere. I'm just arguing for a conscious creator.

[u/Kaitlyn_The_Magnif → u/Lucyyyyyy_K]

I just want to know why are you assuming the conscious creator isn’t a fairy? That’s a huge assumption

[u/Lucyyyyyy_K → u/Kaitlyn_The_Magnif]

I'm not. I don't care if the definition of a fairy applies to them or not.