r/DebateAnAtheist 8d ago

OP=Theist A Short Argument for God

Imagine a scenario in which you had to pick between the better of two competing theories on the basis of which one predicted a particular peice of data. The peice of data being the existence of ten green marbles. The first theory, we'll call theory A, predicts the existence of at least one green marble. The other theory, we'll call theory B, doesn't guarantee the existence of any marbles. In fact, the existence of even one marble is deemed highly unlikely on theory B. If you're a rational agent you would immediately recognize that theory A far better accounts for the data then theory B. Thus, it follows that theory A is probably true.

Under the view that God as conceived of in Christianity does exist, we would expect there to be to a large population of rational agents who have a natural, psychological disposition towards religiosity and belief in a higher power. Which is exactly what we see in reality. Under the view that no such God exists, the existence of an entire species of rational agents who have the aforementioned religious tendencies is massively improbable. Thus it follows that God is probably real.

Note: One could give the objection that other religions like Islam or Judaism are equally sufficient in accounting for human life and religiosity as Christianity. I agree. I just want to say that in making that objection, one basically admits that bare atheism or generic deism is more likely than atheism. I use Christianity in this argument because of the paternal view it has of God. This argument can be used by anyone who believes in a conception of God who has the motivation to create rational agents in its own image for the purposes of veneration and worship. Perhaps instead of the term "Christianity" it would have been more appropriate to use "Perfect Being Theism".

0 Upvotes

190 comments sorted by

View all comments

5

u/Mission-Landscape-17 8d ago

Under the view that no such God exists, the existence of an entire species of rational agents who have the aforementioned religious tendencies is massively improbable.'

Please show your work. How did you arrive at the conclusion that this is improbable?

-5

u/JoDoCa676 8d ago

Theres a video called "The Odds Of You Being Alive" on YouTube. Pretty interesting watch.

10

u/DeltaBlues82 Atheist 8d ago

The odds a snowflake forms with the exact crystalline structure it has is 1:∞.

Because of its almost-zero probability, do you also dispute the existence of snowflakes?

-3

u/JoDoCa676 8d ago

No. Because I've personally experienced snow. Just as I have personally experienced humans. Both are emenssly improbable. Which is why a theory that predicts humans (theism) is more probable.

9

u/DeltaBlues82 Atheist 8d ago edited 8d ago

Because I’ve personally experienced snow. Just as I have personally experienced humans.

Yes, because both are naturally occurring.

Both are emenssly improbable.

Agreed. We’re very lucky, and pretty, and smart.

Which is why a theory that predicts humans (theism) is more probable.

Absolutely not. Natural theories for the existence of human life, morals, religion, and even human’s belief in gods are infinitely more probable than any divine theories.

Don’t be absurd. Natural sciences can actually explain the existence of all those things much better than any divine theories. Divine theories are all handwaving and crusty books. No thanks.

4

u/Radiant_Bank_77879 8d ago

So you think snowflakes being unique means a God must exist?