What is the underlying issue in "the God debate"?

Question

Seems that whenever a discussion fails to progress (in the way the debate over God's existence has), there is an underlying element that has gone unaddressed.

What do you think the disagreement is really about?

Answer 1

I think it's concerning the reality of death. Theists in the US almost all point to an afterlife, achieved via simple belief. Atheists (mostly) consider death the end of awareness, although our chemicals and energy continue to exist.

By arguing about God, we get to avoid the point of facing death.

^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^

Answer 2

I think the disagreement is about something that cannot be compromised on. In other words, we're arguing purely for the sake of arguing. There's no proof of God, but we haven't disproven that God exists either. So, the stance is purely individual belief and opinion. And it should be left at that. If I don't believe, that is my personal choice. If you do, that is your personal choice.

What we should be arguing about is how to go about finding out if God does or does not exist.

I guess I could have just said, "We are at an impasse." But I do believe the argument really is about the existence of God. Despite the futility of it . . .

Answer 3

Partly about control, fear and selfishness.

The control issue in my view is where we all want to influence the things in our world which have an impact on us. Where we can control something, we make every effort to do so. Where there is something out of our control, we have trouble. Life and death fall squarely here. We never gain that much control over either, and they are our book ends. We can't seem to push them much wider than 75 - 100 years.

Fear creeps in when we begin to understand how limited our control is over the world around us. With life and death specifically, and probably most importantly, the questions that come up can be troubling. What is our meaning? Surely we do have meaning, don't we? Without some purpose, all that's left is about 75 - 100 years, and then nothing? It seems like something many people fear.

Selfishness is largely the answer for most folks. Serve yourself, please yourself, gratification at almost any cost. Why not? You only have 75 - 100 years to live, then you're done.

All of these are answered in my belief in Christ Jesus. The answers that man has on his own run counter to the teachings of my Master. Giving Him control helps eliminate fear, especially the fear of death. Selfishness is one of the sinful byproducts of a Godless life. It is a hopeless companion.

Answer 4

Great question! I have often wondered about that issue myself, and I look forward to checking out all of the answers.

Here it goes for me:

The MOST basic issue as I see it is that there are two camps; The people that believe that God makes the rules, and that we should follow them; And the people that believe that we should make our own rules, and do as we see fit. To me that is basically it. Who is running this show, us or God?

And the most basic argument, upon which all other augments are built upon, is the "Appeal to Authority" argument (or "premise", whichever you prefer).

There is no "hard proof" on either side of the argument. Only appeals to the witness testimony and authority of others, upon which our arguments are based upon. There are only evidence and facts that are ALWAYS interpreted according to framework (or a filter or paradigm, whichever you prefer to call it). Nobody was there in the beginning, so we do not have first hand knowledge, only the witness accounts, and interpretations of others, upon which we must test the credibility of the witness, the authentication of the documentation, and the bias of the interpretation of the evidence. Technically, the "appeal to authority" argument is classified in critical thinking as a "false argument", but that is the basic building block that we all seem to go by.

In summary: Who is the boss, us or God? And the "false argument" of "appeal to authority", who has the proper authority anyway?

Great question, gets down to the roots of all that is in R&S.

Answer 5

It seems to be about accepting explanations for things that the individual may not truly be able to understand or fathom. People reject explanations they cannot conceive of and fill that hole with God. In the end, it seems to be about people not wanting to let go of that security blanket, accept the unknown, and leave it at that.

In addition, it can be quite difficult to let go of superstition that scares you, which you have been taught since birth. Fear is a big factor - again, it is largely the fear of the unknown.

Answer 6

The fundamental question is:

"does every question have a rational answer"

To expand on this point, if every question has a rational answer, then there is never any need to invoke a metaphysical being to explain something we do not understand. To put it another way:
If we can explain the universe rationally, then there is no need for god.

Answer 7

The difference of the people answering the question and the fact that God is something that we choose to believe in. I know there is a greater power, and I may call him, her, it, God, but I choose not to push those beliefs on anyone for they have their own free will.

It boils down to the differences of the individuals and their own free will.

Answer 8

Why a God who is supposed to be almighty can't seem to show up. The religions have been giving thousands of years of excuses.

Answer 9

Pride, Man wants to disprove God so he can live with out him, in the end that's what they will get an eternity of God abscess is hell, Pride caused by sin is what it boils down to, God sets boundaries, and people don't like it

Answer 10

It is no longer about finding truth.
It has become proving you are right.
That becomes much more important to those involved rather than admitting fault where applicable and coming to terms with new found truth.