What is the best argument for the existence of God?

Question

I don't care if you believe in God, I just want to know what you think the best argument you've heard for his existence. For the sake of this question, assume that God is:
1. Eternal, or at least as old as the universe
2. Omnipresent, or at least capable of being many places at once
3. Omnipotent, or so powerful that we wouldn't understand his limitaions
4. Sensient (no Hagelian "Geist", I mean a god that knows he exists and that he is God.)
5. Purposeful.
6. Not "created" or "evolved" or other things that would make him just a better version of us.

I am also asking the opposite question, and I would appreciate people answering both questions.

I actually asked the opposite question as a different question:
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/?qid=20060710180542AAUzX6l&r=w
So there are 10 points available for both answers if you answer the question in both places!

Answer 1

The most popular argument for God is The Design Argument, which goes:

The world has the appearance of having been designed, like, say, clocks are designed. A thing that's designed must have a designer. Therefore, the world has a designer, whom we call God.

Criticism: the argument is an analogy, and the conclusions of analogies are never certain, even if their premises are true. What's more, apparent design can also be explained by the evolutionary scientific worldview.

Then there's the Ontological Argument:

God is that than which nothing more perfect can be conceived. A perfect thing would not be the most perfect conceivable if it did not exist. Therefore, God exists.

Criticism: The argument steps fallaciously from concept to extra-conceptual reality.

Or there's Pascal's Wager:

The choice of whether or not to believe in God involves a risk, a gamble. If we choose not to believe and God does exist, we risk losing our immortal soul and/or suffering an eternity of punishment. On the other hand, if we choose to believe and God doesn't exist we have lost nothing and have gained hope and comfort in our lives. Therefore, the best bet is to believe in God.

Criticism: The argument only works for a certain limited concept of a God who punishes unbelief. What's more, the argument makes the very questionable assumption that faith can have exclusively pragmatic motives.

Answer 2

Science has evolved on an almost exponential scale. With the advent of more and more equipment to peer into the elemental level of our world, more questions on the existence of a god, or as most religions agree an omnipotent God, than ever before. I believe the biggest argument for the existence of the being known as God is that no matter how far we go back, there needs to be a beginning force. If you believe in Creationism, God had a master plan for all of the Earth. If you be live in Darwinism, the beings that survived and thrived had to come from an earlier species. And the most compelling to me is the Big Bang. What was there to explode, a large body of mass in space, where did that come from. Some scientific groups have even used the name of God as the energy force in existence that allowed the Big Bang to occur. No matter how far we search, there must have been some force or energy present that created and began the Universe; an omnipotent God.

Answer 3

The history of religion is filled, even today, with examples that the greatest "proof" of God's existence is the imminent threat of death if you don't believe in God's existence. If a Muslim in most of the Middle East were to declare that they no longer believed in Allah, they would most likely be dead soon afterwards.

There are no valid arguments for the existence of God, or any metaphysical entity or event, that have held up under critical examination.

Of course that doesn't prove that God does not exist and neither are there valid arguments that God does not exist.

My whole take on "things" that cannot be verified to exist or not is that they should be ignored. Only things that have any validity need to be respected or given your attention. Things that you are taught exist through fear are the least likely to really exist.

One final thing on the "existence" of God. If God exist that means in some sense that God is an object and limited. The existence of God objectifies God, turns God into a limited thing. That ought to cause some serious reconsideration about the whole God exists question. If a God is to be worshipped, it has to be a God that doesn't exist!

Answer 4

Blaise Pascal, from online Catholic Encyclopedia: (copy)

" ... What Pascal's plan was, can never be determined, despite the information furnished by Port Royal and by his sister. It is certain that his method of apologetics must have been at once rigorous and original; no doubt, he had made use of the traditional proofs -- notably, the historical argument from prophecies and miracles. But as against adversaries who did not admit historical certainty, it was stroke of genius to produce a wholly psychological argument and, by starting from the study of the human soul, to arrive at God. Man is an "incomprehensible monster", says he, "at once sovereign greatness and sovereign misery." Neither dogmatism nor pyrrhonism will solve the enigma: the one explains the greatness of man, the other his misery; but neither explains both. We must listen to God. Christianity alone, through the doctrine of the Fall and that of the Incarnation, gives the key to the mystery. Christianity, therefore, is truth. God being thus apprehended and felt by the heart -- which "has its reasons that the mind knows not of", and which, amid the confusion of the other faculties, is never mistaken -- it remains for us to go to Him through the will, by making acts of faith even before we have faith.

"Another curious argument of Pascal's is that which is known as the argument of the wager. God exists or He does not exist, and we must of necessity lay odds for or against Him.

"If I wager for and God is -- infinite gain;
If I wager for and God is not -- no loss.
If I wager against and God is -- infinite loss;
If I wager against and God is not -- neither loss nor gain.

"In the second case there is an hypothesis wherein I am exposed to the loss of everything. Wisdom, therefore, counsels me to make the wager which insures my winning all or, at worst losing nothing. Innumerable works were devoted to Pascal in the second half of the nineteenth century. Poets, critics, roman-writers, theologians, philosophers have drawn their inspiration from him or made him the subject of discussion. As M. Bourget has said, he is not only one of the princes of style, but he represents the religious soul in its most tragic and terrified aspects. Moreover, the problems which he presents are precisely those which confront us nowadays. "

Answer 5

How did life begin? That seems pretty God-like.
What existed prior to the Big Bang (and what caused it)? That's got some God-prints on it.

Answer 6

If you're going to try to convince someone else with this argument, it's usually a waste of time.
If it's something you want to contemplate for yourself, try not differentiating between the Creator and Creation.

Answer 7

Do not argue about His existence. You either believe or you don't and nothing will change that. Arguing is futile and God IF He exists is big enough to defend Himself. Humans shouldn't argue about it. It just weakens your faith.

Answer 8

we are not made to be perfect (finite).
since finite cannot create finite... because we're not perfect so how can someone create a perfect image of one self if they themselves is not perfect?
there has to be a infinite being that created human beings. He created us in the image of himself. In the image doesn't mean equal to, so he created us as finite.

Answer 9

o my!!! now u will have all those people talking about love and the spirit of god in a child´s smile...or faith...well i will be brave and i will read all thje answers as a punishment for being here so late...
By the way if u are a man and handsome why dont we look for god in private????

Answer 10

well if u believe in ghost, then there also god, cause if good and bad are a contrast they will be there