Many of us that debate with theists realize that there are a limited number of arguments for God’s existence. I am going to give an overview of each of the main ones here, and cover them in depth in the next few posts.
Cosmological Argument
This argument is essentially that the universe needs a first cause. Originally based on ideas of Aristotle, the “prime mover” is necessary to get everything in the universe started into motion. This is probably the most convincing of all the arguments for the existence of God merely because we can only find evidence of things so far back in cosmological history. Theists will tell you that they know what the prime mover is, and you won’t be able to do the same in return. Forgetting for a moment that they are still putting the cart before the horse, this disadvantage can make theists circle if you aren’t prepared for it.
Teleological Argument
This is probably the most common argument for the existence of God, and it takes several forms. When you hear someone use the words watch, painting or “too perfect” in their argument, it is most likely that they are using this argument. The essence of the argument is that complex things must be designed, and since life, the universe, and various other things are complex, they must have been created.
This is a simple one to dismiss if you understand much of anything about science, but it is probably one of the more difficult ones to get a theist to drop. If they are making this argument, they probably deny many scientific theories.
Argument from Moral Authority
This one has gotten me beating my head against a wall more often than any other. The reason is that it seems that some fairly intelligent people hold to this idea, and it seems like such an easy one to refute. It seems like since it is so easy to understand that it should be easy to convey the falsity to the people arguing it. This just doesn’t seem to be the case.
Essentially this argument assumes that there is such a thing as moral realism, and therefore morals are objective. If you assume this to be true, a moral authority such as God is the best explanation for such things, and therefore God exists. This argument is a tough one for me because it is difficult for me to understand how people can think that there is an objective morality that everyone just knows. I have figured out why people claim this, and I will explain it in depth when I make my individual post on this subject.
Ontological Argument
The ontological argument takes several forms as well, and some are much better than others. Some of them are just plain silly, and others are very complex but flawed. The essential argument is that you can prove the existence of God purely by using logical deduction, and nothing but the mind is necessary for this process.
These arguments aren’t used much, mainly because they are all rather difficult to understand. Also, when you debate these arguments with theists, they will use words you may not have a clue about. The people that argue these arguments often try asking you a bunch of questions in an attempt to get you into a corner. These types of arguments are the last I will touch on because they are the most difficult to debate, and I want to spend a bit more time on them.
You Will be Prepared
I plan on going over these arguments one at a time in an effort to give you the ability to easily refute any of these things when they come your way. The range of these arguments is quite vast, and is even varied even within each individual argument. Understanding the strengths and weaknesses of all of these arguments will give you a very good foundation when it comes time to debate, and no debating toolkit should ever be without a good understanding of these things.
Related posts: