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

[an anarchist]

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

To answer your title question though...

Well I don't think that's a "valid" question. On what grounds do you say "just because God exists"? That has no bearing in provable reality.

 

[Trailblazer]

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.

Well, I am glad somebody understands what I was getting at. I owe you one.

Yes, The person in the OP is make-believe. The God that this person believes in could be make-believe or it could be real, but that was not my point.
My questions were based upon the make-believe person believing that the God is real.

Here is the correct restatement of the game I am playing:

Some make-believe person believes that there is a real God. This 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 God, then they should do as that God says. But never should that make-believe person ever not like his God.

This is the conundrum a Baha'i finds themself in if they don't like 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.

The problem is that the make-believe person believes that this God is the only real God, so the make-believe person cannot believe in any other God.
So even if the make-believe person doesn't like, or even hates, this God, the make-believe person feels compelled to serve that God out of duty and/or fear.

 

[an anarchist]

Some make-believe person believes that there is a real God. This 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 God, then they should do as that God says. But never should that make-believe person ever not like his God.

It sounds like an abusive relationship. Make believe person should get out of it

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

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

Which and what god?

The Abrahamic God who is All-Powerful, All-Knowing, and All-Wise.

Here we go again! The same thing, repeated over and over again -- the same question asked over and over again, but never really answered. What is this "evidence for God (the Abrahamic, tri-omni one)" that you claim exists. What is the evidence for it possessing all possible powers, all possible knowledge, and all possible wisdom, and is there the same sort of evidence that mitigates against any of those?

 

[Trailblazer]

Here we go again! The same thing, repeated over and over again -- the same question asked over and over again, but never really answered. What is this "evidence for God (the Abrahamic, tri-omni one)" that you claim exists. What is the evidence for it possessing all possible powers, all possible knowledge, and all possible wisdom, and is there the same sort of evidence that mitigates against any of those?

The evidence for God is Messengers of God, but this thread is not about evidence for God.
#7
#15

 

[Trailblazer]

It sounds like an abusive relationship. Make believe person should get out of it

I would if I could but it's not that easy.

 

[Trailblazer]

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.

That is exactly it. I'm sure glad someone finally understands what I was getting at.

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.

That is exactly it. It is personal preference and liking or not liking God is wholly irrelevant though when it comes to one's personal belief in God.
For me, it goes back to what I believe as evidence for God, so liking or not liking God isn't a factor, although for some people it is a factor, since they would not believe in a God they do not like.

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.

That's true. One is not going to fear a God that they do not believe exists. Yes, it goes back to evidence.

Again, if you believe in a specific god that requires that of you. It goes back to belief.

Yes, it depends upon what kind of God one believes in.

I think the examples you raise are moot.

I am failing to see the point?

No, I think you understood my point quite well.

 

[Trailblazer]

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

To answer your title question though...

Well I don't think that's a "valid" question. On what grounds do you say "just because God exists"? That has no bearing in provable reality.

No, the title question doesn't make sense as a standalone, but I figured the OP would further clarify what I was asking.

I could have made the title Is it reasonable to believe in God even if you don't like God? and that would have fit the OP better.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

The evidence for God is Messengers of God, but this thread is not about evidence for God.
#7
#15

And "Messengers of God" are that because -- well, because they say they are. We should try to compile a list of all those people throughout history who have made that claim. I rather think that would be truly revelatory.

 

[LuisDantas]

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?

Honestly, I have no idea.

It is all just so out there.

 

[Trailblazer]

And "Messengers of God" are that because -- well, because they say they are. We should try to compile a list of all those people throughout history who have made that claim. I rather think that would be truly revelatory.

No, they are not Messengers of God because they say they are. A claim is only a claim, it proves nothing at all.
They are Messengers because God sent them with a message, at least that is true for the legitimate ones.

 

[Trailblazer]

Honestly, I have no idea.

It is all just so out there.

Indeed, it would be difficult to imagine yourself in such a situation unless you are in that situation.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

No, they are not Messengers of God because they say they are. A claim is only a claim, it proves nothing at all.
They are Messengers because God sent them with a message, at least that is true for the legitimate ones.

And you cannot see that your claim is simply more of the same?

I have a message -- and it is true! It is wrong to mutilate your son's penis, causing him pain and risking infection or any of the other harms that surgery could cause (and has caused, see David Reimer). Does that make me a "Messenger of God?" Or am I wrong because Moses got the message to "chop away?"

 

[Trailblazer]

And you cannot see that your claim is simply more of the same?

I make no claims. The Messenger makes the claims.
Everyone who makes a claim is not the same. It is our job to differentiate the true claimants from the false claimants.

I have a message -- and it is true! It is wrong to mutilate your son's penis, causing him pain and risking infection or any of the other harms that surgery could cause (and has caused, see David Reimer). Does that make me a "Messenger of God?" Or am I wrong because Moses got the message to "chop away?"

No, you are only a Messenger of God if God sent you with a message.
They are Messengers only if God sent them with a message. That is what makes a person a Messenger.
How we determine who is a Messenger is another subject.

 

[Heyo]

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?

"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.” ― Aristotle​

If "God" (whatever that is) really existed, it would be denying reality to not believe in it.
If I didn't like Donald J. Trump it wouldn't be reasonable to not believe in his existence.
If I did fear Donald J. Trump it wouldn't be reasonable to not believe in his existence.

It would be reasonable to not serve Donald J. Trump out of duty.

The last one is a bit more complicated. It may sometimes be reasonable to serve an unloved entity. If that entity is like YHVH, jealous, egocentric, anger issues, violent, not serving it could have unreasonable consequences.
Good thing that it doesn't exist.

 

[Trailblazer]

Good thing that it doesn't exist.

Sometimes I wish it didn't.

 

[McBell]

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

Since I am unaware of the existence of someone who believes something without evidence of said something...
No problem.

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?

Here is where I am confused.
Are you asking if it is reasonable to believe in god if your evidence for god is disliking god?
Are you asking if it is reasonable to believe in god if your evidence for god is fear of god?

 

[Twilight Hue]

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?

I agree with those that it's unreasonable to think there is evidence for God.

 

[McBell]

It's unreasonable to think there is evidence for God.

then what causes belief in god?

 

[Twilight Hue]

then what causes belief in god?

Probably all started with nature and early man not understanding how nature works.