Q
What Constitutes Proof of God?
- Thread starter Namaste Jesus
- Start date
Gordian Knot
Being Deviant IS My Art.
My first response to the question still stands. It is not possible to prove, or to disprove the existence of a God(s).
And to that I would add that there is no reason to prove or disprove the existence of a God(s). If one has a genuine belief in the beyond, what more does one need? This constantly bantering back and forth between believers and nonbelievers (and I am as guilty of this as anyone), more and more to me, seems silly. And really rather pointless.
And to that I would add that there is no reason to prove or disprove the existence of a God(s). If one has a genuine belief in the beyond, what more does one need? This constantly bantering back and forth between believers and nonbelievers (and I am as guilty of this as anyone), more and more to me, seems silly. And really rather pointless.
Agreed.
Nothing. St Anselm said 'theology is faith seeking understanding'. I pursue theology not as a reason to believe, but to reason my belief, for the sake of my own sanity.
Quite.
One thought ... you say: "If one has a genuine belief in the beyond", to which I'd like to add, "and a genuine belief in the possibility of the here and now!" ... methinks if I put as much time and effort into doing Christianity, as I do arguing here, I'd be a saint by now!
Gordian Knot
Being Deviant IS My Art.
Oh, Thomas. We should be using our time and effort doing something rather than just talking about it? Where oh where do you get these absurd ideas from?!?!?!?
There might be several levels to the question:
1. What constitutes proof to others, including God, that we ourselves are anything more than a bio-bot, a cascade of chemical reactions untwisted from DNA and environmental reaction?
2. What constitutes proof that others, or other things are anything more than a bio-bot, or cascaded physical reaction?
3. What constitutes proof that there is a higher power that is not bounded to a bio moving thing, sort of a spirit that is free of the mass?
4. What constitutes proof that a higher power is the creator of the fabric and physical building blocks of this universe?
5. What constitutes proof that it is wise, or in the interest of anyone, including a higher power, that we work towards associating with and interacting with a higher power?
The answer of whether or not a higher, non-human and non-physical power can be proved, is yes. Yes, I know the common reaction to that statement, and no, I do not seek that reaction. No, there is no evidence or proof in the statement itself, and neither should you merely believe it. A spirit is just not a proof in the physical experimental sense where we conduct an experiment with a mechanical thing, poke and probe, or watch in silence, and receive a repeatable mechanical response. That would be the method of proving that the bio-bots we are with are indeed really nothing more than the mechanical bio-bots that they are. Yes it is indeed the human animal if we get the result that we expected, right? The word 'proof' is twisted: the word itself is a form of a proof, because there is no bio-bot or physical thing can ever prove anything to you. Evidence and bio-bots do not prove or disprove... consider that of anyone that says they can not prove or disprove. So, turn it against yourself: what proves that you are not a cascade of well evolved knee-jerk reactions and chemical emotions? Surely you can admit: Some of what people do is verifiably just knee-jerk reaction and well evolved, chemically controlled bio-bot behavior. What would make a bio-bot special, to demonstrate that it really is something more than just a bio-bot, like some kind of a tool or vehicle of a higher level entity? We know what our own knee-jerk reaction is like: is that really us, out of control? If not, why are we different and how can we each prove that to each other? What would constitute proof to God, or to another, that we really are in fact something more than a bio-bot, with the good stuff? Find the answer to that, and we will have a different viewpoint on words like 'prove' and 'exist'.
Do we really wish a higher power to be like these other pesky bio-bots that will make their presence known to us, requiring us to obey them, whether we like them or not? It seems there is a higher power that we can ignore, and succeed in our ignorance of. Take the blue pill. We can even look in all of the proverbial windows, and we won't see anyone, but there are doors, and if we don't at least knock on that door... the door does not open. If the door is opened, will the door ever be closed again? Perhaps it is a scary future like getting hitched: are we really looking to have the door opened, or are we just wanting a peek into the window to see if there is someone behind that curtain? Whose to say that a higher power thinks and treats us with any more respect than a fly?
So, my attempt to answer the question, a change in perspective of the concept of a proof and existence are required, and this change requires exploration and introspection over a time span, which is not an independent solo exercise. How do we prove ourselves to each other? If we are wanting to just look for a statue behind the curtain, or have someone hand us a fragment of a statue, we see nothing special. In our consideration of our game plan, perhaps if we substitute our consideration for another physical bio-thing, like an Alien from another home world. How are we going to prove that another Alien exists? Do we wait for their signal, or do we send our own? Do we make them take the journey, or do we make it ourselves? If we find other moving bio-bots, how are we going to prove that they are not merely bio-bots, but in fact have sentient and benevolent beings among them? Will they see us as cattle, or wild beasts? Consider the opposite: How do we prove that we are sentient and benevolent beings? According to the news, some of us are apparently not. Can we prove that a higher power Alien exists, that is not human and that has a home somewhere else? Well, I say the answer is yes. We can prove that a higher power Alien exists. I know the common reaction to that statement, and no... no really, I do not seek a knee jerk reaction to it. If it makes anyone feel any better, they are welcome to take the blue pill and consider this as just being what it truly is... the ramblings of noise.
1. What constitutes proof to others, including God, that we ourselves are anything more than a bio-bot, a cascade of chemical reactions untwisted from DNA and environmental reaction?
2. What constitutes proof that others, or other things are anything more than a bio-bot, or cascaded physical reaction?
3. What constitutes proof that there is a higher power that is not bounded to a bio moving thing, sort of a spirit that is free of the mass?
4. What constitutes proof that a higher power is the creator of the fabric and physical building blocks of this universe?
5. What constitutes proof that it is wise, or in the interest of anyone, including a higher power, that we work towards associating with and interacting with a higher power?
The answer of whether or not a higher, non-human and non-physical power can be proved, is yes. Yes, I know the common reaction to that statement, and no, I do not seek that reaction. No, there is no evidence or proof in the statement itself, and neither should you merely believe it. A spirit is just not a proof in the physical experimental sense where we conduct an experiment with a mechanical thing, poke and probe, or watch in silence, and receive a repeatable mechanical response. That would be the method of proving that the bio-bots we are with are indeed really nothing more than the mechanical bio-bots that they are. Yes it is indeed the human animal if we get the result that we expected, right? The word 'proof' is twisted: the word itself is a form of a proof, because there is no bio-bot or physical thing can ever prove anything to you. Evidence and bio-bots do not prove or disprove... consider that of anyone that says they can not prove or disprove. So, turn it against yourself: what proves that you are not a cascade of well evolved knee-jerk reactions and chemical emotions? Surely you can admit: Some of what people do is verifiably just knee-jerk reaction and well evolved, chemically controlled bio-bot behavior. What would make a bio-bot special, to demonstrate that it really is something more than just a bio-bot, like some kind of a tool or vehicle of a higher level entity? We know what our own knee-jerk reaction is like: is that really us, out of control? If not, why are we different and how can we each prove that to each other? What would constitute proof to God, or to another, that we really are in fact something more than a bio-bot, with the good stuff? Find the answer to that, and we will have a different viewpoint on words like 'prove' and 'exist'.
Do we really wish a higher power to be like these other pesky bio-bots that will make their presence known to us, requiring us to obey them, whether we like them or not? It seems there is a higher power that we can ignore, and succeed in our ignorance of. Take the blue pill. We can even look in all of the proverbial windows, and we won't see anyone, but there are doors, and if we don't at least knock on that door... the door does not open. If the door is opened, will the door ever be closed again? Perhaps it is a scary future like getting hitched: are we really looking to have the door opened, or are we just wanting a peek into the window to see if there is someone behind that curtain? Whose to say that a higher power thinks and treats us with any more respect than a fly?
So, my attempt to answer the question, a change in perspective of the concept of a proof and existence are required, and this change requires exploration and introspection over a time span, which is not an independent solo exercise. How do we prove ourselves to each other? If we are wanting to just look for a statue behind the curtain, or have someone hand us a fragment of a statue, we see nothing special. In our consideration of our game plan, perhaps if we substitute our consideration for another physical bio-thing, like an Alien from another home world. How are we going to prove that another Alien exists? Do we wait for their signal, or do we send our own? Do we make them take the journey, or do we make it ourselves? If we find other moving bio-bots, how are we going to prove that they are not merely bio-bots, but in fact have sentient and benevolent beings among them? Will they see us as cattle, or wild beasts? Consider the opposite: How do we prove that we are sentient and benevolent beings? According to the news, some of us are apparently not. Can we prove that a higher power Alien exists, that is not human and that has a home somewhere else? Well, I say the answer is yes. We can prove that a higher power Alien exists. I know the common reaction to that statement, and no... no really, I do not seek a knee jerk reaction to it. If it makes anyone feel any better, they are welcome to take the blue pill and consider this as just being what it truly is... the ramblings of noise.
Welcome Noise, you lost me on that one.
The question I posed here was mainly geared toward non-believers, as most believers either require no proof of God's existence or those like myself see proof of God's existence in nearly everything.
The idea was, whatever your personal concept of God may be, what would you consider proof that God exist?
For instance, if someone associates God with human form perhaps seeing him in the flesh would be proof. Or, if you think of God in more general terms perhaps your proof would be something verifiable in a more scientific way.
In any event, welcome aboard.
The question I posed here was mainly geared toward non-believers, as most believers either require no proof of God's existence or those like myself see proof of God's existence in nearly everything.
The idea was, whatever your personal concept of God may be, what would you consider proof that God exist?
For instance, if someone associates God with human form perhaps seeing him in the flesh would be proof. Or, if you think of God in more general terms perhaps your proof would be something verifiable in a more scientific way.
In any event, welcome aboard.
Marcialou
We are stardust
When I try to conceptualize a God that I could possibly believe in, it is an either an idea, like beauty or love; or an impersonal force, like gravity.
If it's an idea, then its form is in the mind of the beholder, and really there is no proof.
If it's a force, it's like Einstein's God, a unifying theory of how the universe works, but it has no consciousness and is therefore indifferent to us. I probably wouldn’t recognize it as God.
I don't believe in any inherent meaning in the Universe and find no purpose in life other than what we make of it. I find meaning in family, friends, nature, creativity, compassion, the arts, and "tikkun olam" - healing the earth.
Whether I am going to believe or not believe someone, is not contingent on whether or not I think they exist, nor whether they exist in nearly everything. As an example, we can believe in a baby, without evidence of who it is, and though their existence is very limited. At some level it is a requirement that there is some form of communication, or at least an attempt at communication.
Maybe asking the question a different way, it will appear a bit different:
Whatever your personal concept of a mum may be, what would you consider proof that the mum exists?
Whatever your personal concept of a friend may be, what would you consider proof that the friend exists?
Whatever your personal concept of an enemy may be, what would you consider proof that the enemy exists?
Do you think it is good to look for a personal concept, for an other, or in an other? If aliens show up on our door step, it might be a bit presumptive that they will speak English for us. Similarly, I can't really look for an alien based on whether or not it speaks English. I think it could actually look like a person, and even speak English.
I don't follow your example, Noise. Babies, Mums, friends, enemies can all be seen in the flesh thus proving their existence. God is something different entirely.
So you do not see any God in babies, mums, friends, or enemies. When you see flesh, how do you distinguish it as being a mum, a friend, or an enemy?
As I've stated in the OP, I see God in everything. I guess I just misunderstood your previous post.
Q
Quirkybird
Guest
Noise your posts are rather hard to follow?
Q
Quirkybird
Guest
???????????????!
Gordian Knot
Being Deviant IS My Art.
Methinks noise is just playing with ya at this point.
A Cup Of Tea
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 3,313
- Reaction score
- 579
- Points
- 108
I think some peoples perception of the world is so different that dialogue is sometimes impossible.
Q
Quirkybird
Guest
You could be right, in which case there is no point in responding to their posts.