Proof of the existence of God

Discussion in 'Religion' started by Jason.Marshall, Jan 16, 2015.

  1. Sarkus Hippomonstrosesquippedalo phobe Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,353
    Because it goes against the evidence.
    You have accepted that a definition does not mean something exists. Yet here you are failing to be able to separate the definition from the existence of that thing.
    You simply can not seem to consider the notion of God simply as a concept, a fiction. You have this a priori assumption that God exists.

    I can imagine a world where God exists and a world where God does not exist. Both look identical to the one we're in now - because whether or not God exists in actuality, we do. Thus if God does not happen to actually exist, and all definitions merely apply to a concept (the same way as mentioned with Superman), then we still exist. If God does exist in actuality, then we still also exist.
    And this is the distinction between God as concept, and God as an actuality beyond that. Both have the same definition, but only one of those actually exists. Superman is a concept, but Superman is not an actuality beyond that.
    You can't seem to separate definition from existence, no matter how hard you try to deny otherwise, no matter how much lip-service you seem to give to the contrary.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. HarryT Registered Member

    Messages:
    61
    This is precisely what I mean with my earlier post. You are completely missing the point Yazata (like many here). Jan is talking about the definition of God only. Not at all about the existence of God. The point is (only): Everybody has to have a definition of what God is. Because it is impossible to say you believe in something or not believe in something that is not defined.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Sarkus Hippomonstrosesquippedalo phobe Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,353
    I disagree, if all we're talking about is "THE definition" of God being the Original Cause.
    If we do not make any a priori assumptions as to whether God exists or not, this is the same as not having an assumption that our existence has an Original Cause.
    All we know is the end-point - i.e. our current world.
    We can not conclude (to the best of my knowledge) whether there is an Original Cause or not.
    If there happened to have been one... we end up where we are now.
    If there never was one... we end up where we are now.
    Thus us ending up where we are now is not evidence in any way as to the existence of this Original Cause.
    Only by showing that an Original Cause is necessary can we conclude that God, as per THE definition, exist. Otherwise it is up for grabs.

    Again, not sure I agree.
    We all understand and accept that Jan is using THE definition. The issue that Jan includes within this the (a priori) assumption that God exists.
    If I define Quuble as a four-headed dog that farted out our universe, does this mean that Quuble necessarily exists? No. It is a concept, sure, and if we ever identify a four-headed dog farting out other universes maybe we can conclude that what we are looking at is Quuble. But otherwise, without an a priori assumption of existence, all the definition should be applied to is the concept.
    Jan simply can't seem to separate the two.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Sarkus Hippomonstrosesquippedalo phobe Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,353
  8. Jan Ardena OM!!! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,968
    What's wrong with it?

    From all scriptural accounts the world is home of matter and stuff. It is inevitable that materials disintegrate, become less shiny and new. Things are just simply, naturally falling into decay. The point of God consciousness, and self-realization is to understand your real identity, the one that observes, and to know the source of this observer. So it might be worth looking into it. Jesus certainly thought so, because he could see people losing their identity, and as a result becoming anxious, and fearful.

    What is your definition of God?

    The idea that people believe in God because God made the world, is an atheistic one.
    The world only matters while you are here. So this is a temporary situation. Ultimately all your plans, possessions, relationships, will come to an end. Now do you think that is the end of your existence? Or do you think you will cease to exist as you are, but still exist in some form?

    Can you imagine what it is like to not exist?

    jan.
     
  9. Sarkus Hippomonstrosesquippedalo phobe Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,353
    To belabour the points already made:
    The definition does not make God exist - we've all accepted that (even Jan). So whether or not Jan is talking about the definition of God only, Jan's language, his posts, all drip with the assumption that God exists.
    So when asked to imagine God not existing, Jan claims that this means we wouldn't exist - but the definition alone does not result in this - only God's actual existence as defined would result in this. The definition applies to the concept (which does exist - of that we all agree) but that does not necessitate existence beyond mere concept.
    Jan can't separate the two, it seems. To Jan, if God is defined as the Original Cause then any discussion about God must be done under the assumption that God exists.

    So noone seems to be missing the point here other than Jan.

    It seems that, rather than the actual request to imagine that was posed, the request Jan responded to was more like: "Assume God exists: now imagine if that God did not exist..." - thus one can conclude that if the initial assumption of existence sets God up as the Original Cause, the absence/non-existence of that necessary act would result in us not existing.

    But without the a priori assumption at the start, if one already does believe in the existence of God, as Jan does, then to imagine if God did not exist is to simply imagine that their own belief is wrong, that scriptures are wrong, and that God, while still defined as the Original Cause, is but a mere concept. It would also mean - if one accepts that either there was an Original Cause or there was never an Original Cause, that our existence would be part of an eternity without an original cause. (Of course, this omits the other option that it is meaningless to consider questions outside of our closed universe - i.e. "what happened before the Big Bang?")
     
  10. Spellbound Banned Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,623
  11. Kristoffer Giant Hyrax Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,364
    The Sagan quote appears to be genuine, but you left out that he was agnostic.
     
  12. Yazata Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,902
    Except that Jan repeats over and over that there is only one correct definition of God. And in the sentence that I quoted let slip the idea that it is correct because it corresponds to what God is.

    Of course. I don't think that any of us would argue with that.

    'God' is a word in the English language, with close but not perfect cognates in other languages. Words acquire their meanings from how they are used. Dictionary definitions merely attempt to record how words are currently being used. (Better dictionaries, like the 'Oxford English Dictionary', record historical changes in word usage as well.)

    People often have a whole variety of things in mind when they use the word 'God'. Sometimes they are talking about abstract cosmological concepts like 'first-cause'. Other times they are talking about divine 'persons' that display intelligence, purpose and will, the kind of beings for whom emotions like love are appropriate. They may be talking about some hoped-for source of salvation and deliverance from the imperfections of life and from the inevitability of death. There's often the idea that seemingly fortuitous events in life are purposeful and happen for a larger reason. There's usually some moral aspect to it, often the idea that God is the essence of good. And hanging over it all, there's the poorly-understood idea that God is 'holy', 'sacred', 'divine' and is a (is the) suitable object for religious devotion.

    So obviously we have to clarify what it is that we are talking about before we opine on whether or not we believe in its literal objective existence.

    That's why I told Pachomius that if we are talking about first-causes, or why there is something rather than nothing, or why the 'laws' of nature are what they seem to be, I don't have a clue what the answers are (assuming that answers even exist). My attitude towards those more cosmological kind of questions raised by natural theology is agnostic.

    But if we are talking about the existence of the Yahweh, Allah, Vishnu or Krishna of religious tradition, or about the existence of any divine cosmic Person in whom perfect will, power, intelligence, love, goodness and holiness coincide, I'm basically an atheist.
     
    Last edited: Jul 28, 2015
  13. Spellbound Banned Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,623
    Sagan is quoted as saying "Atheism is stupid" since even atheists sometimes long for a higher being.
     
  14. origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,888
    No, the point is there is no proof that there is or is not a god.

    “I am not an atheist. An atheist is someone who has compelling evidence that there is no Judeo-Christian-Islamic God. I am not that wise, but neither do I consider there to be anything approaching adequate evidence for such a god." Carl Sagan
     
  15. Spellbound Banned Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,623
    My point is that although superstition may be a result of deep feeling, and that it is sometimes hard to distinguish it from reality, we may be living in our own heads, but that definitely does not prove or disprove the existence of a God. As you said.

    I personally count my few experiences as evidence and the fact that I've seen satanic websites that reinforces my belief in God.
     
  16. Spellbound Banned Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,623
  17. HarryT Registered Member

    Messages:
    61
    Stop, and think. Who wrote these scriptural accounts? These where written by religious humans (with all the best intentions, I am sure). The point is: the scriptures are not objective and have no relevance in discussing existence of God any more than an opinion of an unknown person.
    In short: Since I believe all(!) Gods work is done by humans (on this planet at least), my definition of God in short is the Good in ourselves. Nothing more, nothing less. So in that sense I agree with the first part your signature “God is seated in everyones heart”. Not sure about the second part of your signature.
    See here (hope this works) for the long story:
    I will cease to exist. Period.
    Yes, when my consciousness stops and cannot come back anymore (in my brain or a man made device) I don’t exist anymore. Why you ask? You cannot imagine non-existence?
     
  18. HarryT Registered Member

    Messages:
    61
    Interesting. Let me try to explain. First of all, we don’t know if there ever was nothing or not and I don’t think it is logical to assume there ever was nothing. In any case as far as we can “look” back there was a lot of energy that turned into matter (E=mc^2). Initially there was only the basic element: Hydrogen. Gravity pulled this into local, rapidly rotating clusters collapsing under gravity, heating up to a point where fusion started that created (still creates) the heavier elements, burning up, exploding into supernova’s and clustering again into galaxies and solar systems where all kinds of chemical reactions took place under violent circumstances creating complex molecules until at some point RNA/DNA type molecules where created that started replicating where those molecules that where the most successful in replicating got to be most abundant until better/stronger single/multi celled organisms appeared getting more and more advanced/specialized under the mechanism of natural selection ultimately resulting in the world we see today. makes perfect sense indeed (to me at least).
    Well actually: welcome to my world. I do that every day. The one cannot go without the other. At least not in me and I suspect not in any human.
     
  19. Billy T Use Sugar Cane Alcohol car Fuel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,198
    Now you have gone too far! Doubting Thor. I strongly advise you not to go out of doors, except inside a metal cage.

    Science has no explanation as to how a huge number of electrons gets separated (even by kilo meters at times) from their neutralizing positive charges making clouds with millions of volts electric potential difference from the earth where Thor's lightening strikes.

    Thor, the all powerful, does that, unless you have a better explanation.
     
  20. Jan Ardena OM!!! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,968
    But they are the best source of information about who and what God is.
    Not allowing scriptures in a discussion about God, is like not allowing one boxer to in a hit in a fight game.

    God in the heart? If so that is a definition of God. Param-atma .
    The second part refers to the will of the living entity atma.

    I cannot imagine not existing, at least not fully.
    Because not existing means no consciousness, which means no imagination.
    I cannot imagine what it's like to not imagine.

    jan.
     
    Last edited: Jul 28, 2015
  21. Daecon Kiwi fruit Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,133
    If you're going to allow scriptures from one religion, then you have to allow scriptures from every and all religions - not just whichever religion you follow.
     
  22. HarryT Registered Member

    Messages:
    61
    The scriptures are written by religious humans based on real life events or experiences as they saw it, I am sure. But how is that different from say a person like me writing a scripture explaining all these events in an other way? How is it that their opinion or interpretation is any better than mine and are mine no source of information about God while theirs is?
    In this context I view the scriptures as novels about boxers and novels cannot fight real boxers.
    Maybe “God is in the heart” is not precise enough. The heart is(!) God would be better in hindsight.
    I see it as a blissful state of nothingness. The ultimate peace of mind for all eternity. Something to look forward to when you lived a full life, in particular when your body is giving up. But also as an end to any and all suffering a person may have or had.
     
  23. HarryT Registered Member

    Messages:
    61
    Granted, you do have a valid point. There cannot be 100% evidence either way just from where we ended up now.
    I can only say that for me personally it is very illogical that just because we don’t know or don’t understand to something to attribute that to a God. Especially since (at least to me) there is a perfectly sensible scientific explanation for a lot of how the world and universe came to be and also a perfectly sensible scientific explanation to why self-aware beings like ourselves would develop religions whether or not such a God exists or not.
    When I then apply Occam's razor principle, the theory that God does not exist wins.
    But as you correctly pointed out, this and the Occam's razor principle is not 100% evidence.
    I can only say I see a lot of posts from Jan where is saying the following:
    In order to say “I believe in God” or “I don’t believe in God” you have to define God.
    And I (Jan) believe the definition for God is more or less universal for believers on non-believer alike and is: such and such.

    When I then look at the responses they seem to think that Jan is saying that he believes the God defined a such and such exists. But that is completely beside the point.
    Granted, he is not making it easy for us to see this, and I get the feeling he may even like dancing around this point for the sake of discussion. But I could no longer stay silent because you guys where running in circles getting nowhere and so this thread was going nowhere.
     

Share This Page