Is there any religious argument that actually stands when scrutinized with reason?

[Kilgore Trout]

If an argument existed for God's existence which stood up to logical/rational scrutiny, there'd be a lot less atheists. At least atheists via rational skepticism.

 

[ether-ore]

The question assumes that reason somehow stands alone and is not dependent on anything itself. Reason acts on evidence and arbitrary restrictions on evidence cripple one's ability to reason. Another assumption is that arbitrarily restricting evidence to the empirical realm (or purported reports of it) is the only legitimate evidence to draw on when using reason. In any case, I believe it so happens that scripture is a report of empirical evidence. As prophets interact with God empirically and consequently report (as scripture) that He exists; and that coupled with the fact that a cohesive agreement exists among those prophets over the millennia concerning God's existence as well as His nature is legitimate evidence to reason upon.

It is a matter of choice what one chooses to reason upon and it is not legitimate to say that some evidence should be arbitrarily excluded. If you choose to exclude scripture, I believe you are stifling your ability to reason. If you simply do not like scriptural evidence... then there is nothing to talk about.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

In all these years debating with religious people I ve never been faced with an argument that I ended up to find challenging or hard to dismantle. They go from the clever ones to nonsense one ( like "cause I feel it in my heart" ) to the most stupid and elementary ones ( like the classic "what if you're wrong" ) but in the end they always can be rejected by use of reason and logic (even if they usually find unsatisfactory those answers cause they dont praise reason and logic ). Maybe I ve been unlucky and found only weak debaters. So my question is both to religious and not religious people

To non believers I ask, Have you ever faced an argument that really represented a challenge for you or that you weren't able to dismantle?

To believers I ask, is there an argument that you think you can present and that no unbeliever has ever been able to provide a good answer to? ( assuming it wasn't only because you would reject every possible explanation going against your faith, like for example creationists rejecting all the arguments against Noah s ark )

Only once with a JW here on RF. We had a good intense conversation about Christodom and the "Evilness" of the Catholic Church. He had me on a roll with explaining scripture rather than just posting it as if it were self explanatory. On the other hand, we came to a stalemate, since my personal experience and interaction with Catholics not just study and belittling it kind of trumped what he was saying from a "personal" level. I gave him my hat with the knowledge. I just don't think he would get it without experiencing it.

Let me think, everyone one else, and I mean everyone else, either stoped talking to me, ignored me, or just gave up since I don't talk in philosophical language and don't have a lot of religious verbagge that comes with many of the faiths I am associated with. If religion is the first cause, it doesn't need to be complicated.

 

[raph]

No I never heard such an argument. But I also never encountered such an argument for atheism, morals, existence of consciousness other than mine, free will, non free will, that someone loves someone, that I didnt only exist since one second, that the sun will rise tomorrow etc either.

Some things cant be proven, so you gotta have faith.

 

[Sunstone]

"There is a god" and "You should give charitably" are both instances of religious claims. Neither one is totally demonstrable via reason. But that doesn't mean the claims fail to have any utility. And perhaps that is the more important question when it comes to religious claims: Not whether they can be demonstrated to be true, but whether they have any great utility. At any rate, just a thought.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

No I never heard such an argument. But I also never encountered such an argument for atheism, morals, existence of consciousness other than mine, free will, non free will, that someone loves someone, that I didnt only exist since one second, that the sun will rise tomorrow etc either.

Some things cant be proven, so you gotta have faith.

Interesting post, and to a large extent I would agree. However, I think there is a line. When someone's faith in something impacts on someone else in a direct manner, then being unable to rationalise it is a problem (imho).

 

[LuisDantas]

No I never heard such an argument. But I also never encountered such an argument for atheism, morals, existence of consciousness other than mine, free will, non free will, that someone loves someone, that I didnt only exist since one second, that the sun will rise tomorrow etc either.

Some things cant be proven, so you gotta have faith.

Thanks for posting. There are several interesting ideas implied by you, and I want to ask some clarification, if you do not mind:


Atheism

Why would atheism even need an argument "for" it?

Do you have some reason to doubt the sincerity of people when they claim not to hold a belief in the existence of a deity?

Do you perceive atheism as an active stance that somehow demands a justification?


Morals

Morals fulfill a very obvious, practical purpose, and they can and must be judged for their value. I am not sure what you mean by the lack of an argument for them. Is anyone challenging their existence, or what?


Free Will

That is an overused concept. It has no clear meaning at all, and as a matter of fact I don't think it can have any meaning whatsoever except as an attempt at providing an explanation to a certain logical contradiction of some conceptions of God.

 

[psychoslice]

Interesting post, and to a large extent I would agree. However, I think there is a line. When someone's faith in something impacts on someone else in a direct manner, then being unable to rationalise it is a problem (imho).

Its only a problem to the ego.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

"There is a god" and "You should give charitably" are both instances of religious claims. Neither one is totally demonstrable via reason. But that doesn't mean the claims fail to have any utility. And perhaps that is the more important question when it comes to religious claims: Not whether they can be demonstrated to be true, but whether they have any great utility. At any rate, just a thought.

Utility is an interesting area to divert into, though. One argument against ISIS is that it's not truly Islamic, but is (basically) a political grab for power. But, in their own mind at least, usage of religion has utility.
Perhaps I am misunderstanding the meaning of utility though?

 

[George-ananda]

Is there any religious argument that actually stands when scrutinized with reason?

For some scrutinizers the answer would be 'Yes', and for some scrutinizers the answer would be 'No'.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Its only a problem to the ego.

I meant more pragmatically, and it's not limited to religious beliefs, but would include any belief.
Quick example - I believe I should perform genital mutilation on my daughter. My belief is directly impacting on another. This has nothing to do with ego.

 

[psychoslice]

I meant more pragmatically, and it's not limited to religious beliefs, but would include any belief.
Quick example - I believe I should perform genital mutilation on my daughter. My belief is directly impacting on another. This has nothing to do with ego.

Yes it does, for who is making up their mind that this should be done, its all from programming, conditioning and genetics, every decision we make is from that, in fact we don't have free will at all.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Yes it does, for who is making up their mind that this should be done, its all from programming, conditioning and genetics, every decision we make is from that, in fact we don't have free will at all.

You're entitled to your belief. After all, its not directly impacting on me.

Heehee

 

[psychoslice]

You're entitled to your belief. After all, its not directly impacting on me.

Heehee

Yes and so we have the belief, its all from your programming.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Yes and so we have the belief, its all from your programming.

*shrugs*

I'm sticking with the concept of free will for purposes of utility if nothing else.

 

[LuisDantas]

Utility is an interesting area to divert into, though. One argument against ISIS is that it's not truly Islamic, but is (basically) a political grab for power. But, in their own mind at least, usage of religion has utility.
Perhaps I am misunderstanding the meaning of utility though?

I think Sunstone meant utility in the motivational sense. Religious claims are not supposed to be "true" nearly so much as they are supposed to inspire, motivate and hopefully to have clear meanings.

That aside, I also think that it is dangerous to assume that religion in general - and Islam in particular - would not have an interest in political power.

While I am particularly wary of Muslim politics, I must also acknowledge that political representation is a legitimate and necessary concern for most anyone.

 

[Skwim]

To non believers I ask, Have you ever faced an argument that really represented a challenge for you or that you weren't able to dismantle?

Absolutely. Quite a few times in fact. Every so often I'll run into someone whose running argument is so atrocious that it's beyond any reasoned critique.


Came across the following that I think apply to discussions around here more often than they should

“…I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.”
-Stephen F. Roberts

“You cannot reason people out of a position that they did not reason themselves into.”
(Paraphrased from Jonathan Swift- “It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into”)

“The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt.”
– Bertrand Russell

"The weight of evidence for an extraordinary claim must be proportioned to its strangeness.”
-Pierre-Simon Marquis de Laplace
​

And just for kickers.

“It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”
-Upton Sinclair (Ran into this when once debating a minister.)​

 

[Thana]

To believers I ask, is there an argument that you think you can present and that no unbeliever has ever been able to provide a good answer to? ( assuming it wasn't only because you would reject every possible explanation going against your faith, like for example creationists rejecting all the arguments against Noah s ark )

No, but then I've been toying with the Idea that humans can find truth in anything。

For example, I can ask and receive pretty decent answers as to why Catholicism is the true faith or why Mormonism Is the true faith or why the JW's have the truth of it. And yet I don't accept any of those beliefs.

Having good arguments/answers doesn't mean jack.

 

[Mohammad Nur Syamsu]

They go from the clever ones to nonsense one ( like "cause I feel it in my heart" ) .... but in the end they always can be rejected by use of reason and logic

 

[Yoshua]

In all these years debating with religious people I ve never been faced with an argument that I ended up to find challenging or hard to dismantle. They go from the clever ones to nonsense one ( like "cause I feel it in my heart" ) to the most stupid and elementary ones ( like the classic "what if you're wrong" ) but in the end they always can be rejected by use of reason and logic (even if they usually find unsatisfactory those answers cause they dont praise reason and logic ). Maybe I ve been unlucky and found only weak debaters. So my question is both to religious and not religious people

To non believers I ask, Have you ever faced an argument that really represented a challenge for you or that you weren't able to dismantle?

To believers I ask, is there an argument that you think you can present and that no unbeliever has ever been able to provide a good answer to? ( assuming it wasn't only because you would reject every possible explanation going against your faith, like for example creationists rejecting all the arguments against Noah s ark )

Hi Cambridge,

As an evangelical believer, I believe reason and logic is relevant for those people who don't believe in the same reference or basis. This is where logic comes into play. I fully agree and believe that there is a belief or faith that stands when scrutinized with reason or anything else. That is the truth, no one can break the truth if there is truth. Knowing the truth is the highest form of spirituality rather than reasoning.

Thanks