Scientific reasons for belief in God v moral arguments against belief

yadda yadda 2

I have to admit that I do find it very very hard to believe there is no 'God' or higher intelligent power or cosmic force of some kind behind it all. At the very last a non-personal Einstein or Spinoza version of God. The articles here on this website sum up most of my reasons for belief: ww.godevidence.com/category/evidence

On the other hand, I am troubled by the moral arguments against belief and find many of them compelling, ie, arguments springing from the existence of evil and suffering being incompatible with the existence of an all powerful, all knowing, all caring God. Most of these are outlined here: en.wikipaedia.org/wiki/Problem_of_evil

I think ultimately Blaise Pascal was rather right, that we cannot deduce the answer by reason alone and the safest bet is to err on the side of a form of religious belief. I would change Pascals recommendation however, to say that if we cannot obey the greatest command to love God we should at least live a life in adherence to the golden rule to love our neighbour as ourselves (to live a life of "active and indefatigable love of your neighbour" as father Zossima encouraged the 'woman of little faith' in Dosteyovsky's '"The Brothers Karamazov"). And if you can't actively love others, at the very least be kind and do not hurt anyone.

en.wikipaedia.org/wiki/Pascal's_Wager en.wikipaedia.org/wiki/Deism

I think this is the best solution. Do not take a hard position on either side of the atheism v religious fundamentalism question. Don't be a militant atheist and religion basher and don't be a religious fanatic. Suspend and moderate your belief/disbelief in proportion to a life-long examination of weighing up the ever unfolding evidence and debate as intellectually honestly as possible, even if it hurts like hell.

At the very least obey the golden rule and your conscience and the moral laws within your heart and commit to living your life accordingly. If you do that and it turns out the Bible is all true, you should come out on the right side of the fence in the final wash-up and get everlasting life (Rom 2:11-16). atonement.reslight.net

And if you live a life like that but it turns out there is no God and the Bible is wrong, then you have still lived the best of lives.

mindseye

yadda yadda 2 wrote: I am troubled by the moral arguments against belief and find many of them compelling, ie, arguments springing from the existence of evil and suffering being incompatible with the existence of an all powerful, all knowing, all caring God.

The question of evil used to bother me until I read the Bible with blinders off, then it all became clear.

Isaiah 45:7: “I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.”

2 Kings 6:33: "Behold, this evil is of the Lord."

Makes sense, if everything comes from God, then evil comes from God.

I think ultimately Blaise Pascal was rather right, that we cannot deduce the answer by reason alone and the safest bet is to err on the side of a form of religious belief.

It think Pascal's wager is the most simplistic theistic argument. Why is the safest bet to err on the side of a form of religious belief? And if so, what form of religious belief? What if you attend a Christian church all of your life, get to the gates of heaven, and find out that Zeus is on the other side?

I think this is the best solution. Do not take a hard position on either side of the atheism v religious fundamentalism question. Don't be a militant atheist and religion basher and don't be a religious fanatic.

I generally agree. Complete certainty is always a dead end. According to a strict materialist view, atheists have the edge, as the evidence (or lack thereof) is on their side. But hard atheists tend to reduce religion to fundamentalism, and often underestimate the integral part myth and ritual played in human development.

mP

there is no morality in the bible... show me a good dead and ill show you a tyhousand disgusting evils that are labelled righteous,

mP

midseye

you must realise in the ancient world,'especially in holy writings that good=life and bad=death literally. what isaiah is saying is without light and warmth of tyhe sun, plants and animals dont grow and multiple which leads to no food and death. the sayings are never about kindness but merely surivial. nobody can survive the cold and darkness for any extended period of time, and that is why goodness is the light. jesus, jehovah are always the light, literally because they are personific58tions of the sun.'there is onlu one who provides for our wellbeing, and it is the sun.

Qcmbr

We do ourselves great harm when we accept the idea that magic is the answer to a problem and not scientifically discoverable natural laws. Magic thinking stops rational thought and corrodes unfettered research. When faith rules we get the dark ages. Faith is the exact opposite of rational skeptical enquiry. While faith may once have staffed hospitals it is science that made them more than places to go and die.

Phizzy

There are no scientific reasons to believe anything, science does not work that way, it works with testable hypotheses that once confirmed become a Theory.

No belief is necessary if facts are there, belief is trusting that something is true with no proof, facts are proof.

Nobody in the history of this forum has posted satisfactory proof for god, there is none.

So, no scientific reason to believe in God, the moral argument against belief has been eloquently expressed by QCMBR above.

NewChapter

If someone wants to believe in gods, they will believe regardless of scientific evidence. In fact, some believers will even deny scientific evidence in order to believe in their version of their god. Science has absolutely nothing to do with religion. Science has absolutely nothing to do with belief. There are no scientific reasons for belief (unless you'd like to investigate WHY people believe). Science and religion do not inhabit the same bookshelf. Now some people read books from both shelves, but trying to find scientific reasons to believe is like trying to measure an illness with a carpenter's tape measure. It does not apply.

NC

Qcmbr

Believers must reject science in order to believe. Science is the study of observed phenomenon. Religion is the generation of imagined events.

James Brown

There are lots of scientific reasons to believe in God.

And there are lots of reasons not to believe in God.

A lot of the reasons to believe in God are scientific.

A lot of the reasons not to believe in God are maybe more logical than scientific.

Qcmbr

There are no scientific reasons to believe in magic beings

Scientific reasons for belief in God v moral arguments against belief

Share this