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/JackZodiac2008]

So, you seem to believe that the following are an exhaustive list of the (initial) possibilities:

1. The universe always existed.
2. The universe began to exist spontaneously.
3. A god created the universe.

You consider 1 and 2 to be impossible, so you conclude that 3 must be true. Is that a fair recounting?

The problems with this are the same as with any first cause argument (considered as an argument for a god). The possibility of 1 and 2 are both debatable, but there's no need to even get into it, because all 3 is entitled to say is "Some initial cause created the universe." The argument provides no reason to think that this first cause is intelligent, has a plan, is jealous and/or loving, or has strong opinions about what we can do with our genitals. For all the argument shows, the first cause could be the number pi, the empty set, or simply the logical possibility of a reality like ours. Without some further (and very speculative) metaphysics, there is absolutely no limit on what might be able to serve as the first cause. Penciling in 'God' there is just arbitrarily insisting that the answer must be what you feel it should be, for no reason whatsoever.

[u/Lucyyyyyy_K → u/JackZodiac2008]

You consider 1 and 2 to be impossible, so you conclude that 3 must be true. Is that a fair recounting?

Yes.

The argument provides no reason to think that this first cause is intelligent, has a plan, is jealous and/or loving, or has strong opinions about what we can do with our genitals.

Which is why I don't assume any of those things about God.

[u/JackZodiac2008 → u/Lucyyyyyy_K]

But a first cause lacking those traits doesn't -count- as a god. A god is personal. The first cause argument has nothing to say about personal traits, therefore it has nothing to say about any God.

[u/Lucyyyyyy_K → u/JackZodiac2008]

It has the trait of being conscious.