Come on, religious believers. I'm asking. No, begging. What is One Good Reason I should believe in God? (I'm capitalizing those three words to show how serious I am about wanting to know.)
Believe me, I've considered all the reasons for believing. Including, for many years, not needing any reason at all except faith.
That was good enough for me back then. Not now. I love reality too much to keep on believing in God.
I doubt whether anyone can come up with a new One Good Reason that makes any more sense than the reasons that have been debated, discussed, and dismissed over many centuries. But, hey, it doesn't hurt to ask.
Share a reason, and I almost certainly will shoot it down. Unless your reason is so persuasive, I'm left dumbfounded by the brilliance of it. Unlikely, yet possible.
Please... don't give me the "everything must have a cause to exist, except God, the always-existent" argument. That one is easy to dismiss. If something has always existed, why not assume this is the universe? Or the cosmos, assuming a multiverse.
No need for God.
Another weak argument is called the argument from self-authentication in James Lindsay's book, "God Doesn't, We Do." This is a favorite of many commenters on this blog: I know God exists, because I just know.
Apologist William Lane Craig has boldly hung his reputation as a philosopher, but notably not as a theologian, on an impossibly narrow reed by standing firmly with his ultimate argument for the existence of God: the argument from self-authentication.
Craig often refers to it as the "self-authenticating witness of the Holy Spirit," as he is a Christian apologist and therefore argues from the perspective of the only aspect of the triune Christian God that directly interacts with human beings since Jesus' purported ascension (the tales of Paul and Joseph Smith notwithstanding).
In brief, the argument goes like this: "Christianity is true because I have felt that it is true, and the feeling I have had about it authenticates itself because it is genuine and unmistakable."
To put it more on the level where it lies, this claim attempts to prove that God exists by saying more or less the same as many less sophisticated believers: "God exists because I know he does." This, though, does not qualify as an argument.
...The big, stupid elephant in the room with this sort of claim is that it can be used to establish vastly too much. Who wouldn't claim this of essentially any magic they wanted? All they would need to do is invent some aspect of their beliefs that subjectively interfaces with human minds, claim that aspect is self-authenticating, and then use it to support any argument they wanted!
For example, I could deny human-caused global warming by claiming that I have a profound, unmistakable connection to Gaia Spirits that inform me that the changes we are seeing are entirely natural and non-problematic, and that Gaia Spirits genuinely self-authenticate.
It is philosophically indefensible to tell me Gaia Spirits do not exist or self-authenticate and, to assume theological privilege, rude to point out that I might be talking out of my ass.
God doesn't provide self-authenticating experiences through His Holy Spirit, but people may mistake certain psychological experiences for exactly that.