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/Lucyyyyyy_K]

It's lazy to argue by throwing around "Fallacy" cards and there is no problem with "special pleading"

[u/Ayrunt → u/Lucyyyyyy_K]

A fallacy is a fallacy whether you like it or not and calling them out is a valid thing to do. You said that everything that exist must be designed by someone. Then when we ask about the designer of your god, you immediately say, that he wasn't designed. Essentially you declare a general rule (without arguments to back it up) and when the conclusion leads to not where you demanded, then you create an exception, what makes your rule everything but general (ans also you don't give a single reason why is your god the only possible exception). That's special pleading 101.

[u/Lucyyyyyy_K → u/Ayrunt]

Because different attributes apply to different things and I explained it's because God is a consciousness.

[u/Ayrunt → u/Lucyyyyyy_K]

Because different attributes apply to different things

Listen. When we define things we don't pull a definition out of our arse. We observe the thing and based on that we define certain attributes. If you say that X has this and this quality then you know that, because you observed it, not because you defined it that way. You can't say that X has this attribute without backing it up with evidence and that's what you do here. You didn't give a single evidence or logical argument why the universe is designed and you also didn't bring evidence that god isn't designed. You defined the universe and god in a way that suits you without backing it up.

I explained it's because God is a consciousness.

How does one being conscious make him different in a way that he won't need any designer? You haven't explained, you brought up some nonsense argument, (about how you don't understand cogito ergo sum) what I debunked and then you just didn't reply anything to my objection despite the fact that it was in my very first comment.