Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Nuclear Wessel

How would a god prove its existence?

1,102 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Stubbly_Dooright

Any god that has to defend the idea that it / he / she is GOD is not nor will ever be ... the limitation is the mind and the need to be convinced is the delimiter of the heart ~

~

First define the heart then the mind ...then it follows that no gods / god needs to be subservient to mankind ~

Whoa! Wait! This doesn't sound like the kind of God, that the OP is describing, is it? It could be just me, but the God your describing doesn't sound as omniscient as the one in the OP.

I gave you an example, you might extend that to no creature being any more important than another. If there is one attribute that sets humans apart, it may be the potential to reach into God, and complete the circle of creation, the created coming back to know its creator.

"But if you shut up your soul in your body, and abase yourself, and say “I know nothing, I can do nothing; I am afraid of earth and sea, I cannot mount to heaven; I know not what I was, nor what I shall be,” then what have you to do with God?”

If you did give an example, maybe it would you if you provided it again. I can understand 'shutting one's self up' to a point, but how is that a channel to reach God.

I would think this is a good comparison to what the OP is not talking about.

Unburden yourself of the multiplicity of mumbo-jumbo creeds, and venture into the sun-lit uplands of truth, where you alone are the captain, on a voyage to the absolute. But, it is not without its risks, anything that involves averting your attention from the world is risky, but if there is a risk worth taking, this is it.

Are you saying this as a given if practiced the way you state it? You yourself say, there are risks. Well, if one is to reach through your instructions, then there shouldn't be any risks. One should always get there. You have examples?
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Holmesian

The rational mind cannot process that which is not defined/definable. This probably explains why a lot of people over-subscribed to rationalist thinking, are uncomfortable with "god" talk.

Hi Habitat,

Personally I don't have a problem with the concept ( as distinct from the utility) of a God that is indefinable. My problem lies more with being preached to and told the thoughts, laws, likes and dislikes of this indefinable rationally unknowable God by its human adherents. For an indefinable entity a lot of its requirements seem to share the same bias and prejudices of said adherents.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Habitat

Hasten away from those you consider are misleading you, then. I simply state that true religiosity is an inevitable consequence of full psychogical maturation, if that irks you, it is because you have an inaccurate pre-conception of what true religiosity is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then

First of all I should like to mention that I in no way, shape, or form subscribe to any religion or particular sense of spirituality (this is not exactly relevant); at best I would consider myself a pantheist or, as Richard Dawkins so eloquently defines a "pantheist", a "sexed up atheist"... I prefer the latter, just because. ;)

Before writing this out further I should also like to address that this post makes the following assumption:

1.) it assumes that we live in a universe that is governed by a "god"--an all knowing, all-powerful, all-present being who very much interacts with our daily lives.

2.) it assumes that this "god" possesses the capacity to prove its existence to any individual and is able to perform virtually any required task as science needs in order to prove its existence.

Now, following from the second assumption... what does science NEED, exactly, to prove that a god exists? For example, say that there are a particular set of scientists who are ready and willing to investigate a god. Because god is all of the characteristics as I describe it above, it transforms itself into an anthropic being and offers itself for rigorous testing by scientists.

The scientists then present him with questions. I don't know exactly WHAT questions scientists would ask, but I will give it a shot.

The first question is: if you are really a god, turn yourself into a cat. This god agrees and turns itself into a cat, but is this really evidence that such a being is a god and not just an extremely advanced alien life-form that can turn itself into a cat? What if it is, indeed, a human that is born with some exceptional abilities? That doesn't make it god...

The second question is: if you are a god, teleport all of us (the scientists) into the atmosphere of Venus and ensure that there is no harm that comes to us. The "god" obliges and the act is carried out. They then ask the god to transfer them back to where they all were, and he does this. This, again... does not prove that this being is, indeed, a god... it just suggests that it is a being that has extraordinary abilities.

The third question is posed by each scientist: Can you tell me all of my personal information and all about everybody who I have encountered in my life? Can you tell me all about what I am thinking, what I have done throughout the day? Can you tell me exactly how old I am? Can you tell me all of the prayers I have made (if any) and why you have not answered all of them? The "god" obliges and answers all off the information with complete accuracy and precision. But, again... this doesn't mean that the "god" is truly a god... it just means that this god is a being that obviously has some amazing capabilities.

I guess what I am getting at is whether or not there would ever be sufficient evidence from a god to prove that it does, indeed, exist... assuming it really does exist. How could its existence every truly be proven? There would always be an alternate explanation for its abilities--maybe its abilities enable it to perform actions to satisfy all of the questions posed to it but it is not necessarily a "supreme" creator of the universe. How could one differentiate between an actual god and merely a highly advanced ET civilization with extraordinary abilities, but yet lack the capacity to create everything?

I am quite tired and there may be some flaws here in my writing... but overall I think this topic could spark some very interesting discussion. Let me know if there is anything logically flawed with my questioning/ideas and I will adjust them accordingly.

My big question is... what do YOU think a god would have to do to prove that it is, in fact, a god... in particular in the realm of science? It would be exceptionally difficult (if not impossible) to do.

The recurring theme is that no matter what the being does, he cannot be accepted as God.
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
S2F

Have this god create something from nothing. That is the only hard and fast prerequisite for the God of creation.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
and then

How would a god prove its existence? How about revealing itself to everyone on earth at the same time in the same way?

Or perhaps he might give a written record explaining future event 2700 years in advance
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Habitat

Have this god create something from nothing. That is the only hard and fast prerequisite for the God of creation.

Quantitative Easing is God ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rlyeh

Or perhaps he might give a written record explaining future event 2700 years in advance

He can't even get the past right.
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Holmesian

Hasten away from those you consider are misleading you, then. I simply state that true religiosity is an inevitable consequence of full psychogical maturation, if that irks you, it is because you have an inaccurate pre-conception of what true religiosity is.

I think I would be more inclined to a contemplative saunter away rather than anything involving haste. My post was meant to be more general than directed at your position specifically. Also I am perpetually curious, often baffled, disappointed, bemused but almost never irked.

However since you raised it, how is it that you have attained an accurate preconception of true religiosity? Have you attained this level of enlightenment yourself and seen the face of the rationally unknowable God ( face being metaphorical)?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Habitat

I think I would be more inclined to a contemplative saunter away rather than anything involving haste. My post was meant to be more general than directed at your position specifically. Also I am perpetually curious, often baffled, disappointed, bemused but almost never irked.

However since you raised it, how is it that you have attained an accurate preconception of true religiosity? Have you attained this level of enlightenment yourself and seen the face of the rationally unknowable God ( face being metaphorical)?

I am on the road, long and meandering, and not able to tell how far along, but all the signposts I have been given have been encouraging and confirmatory of what I say. The mortal frame is frail, and three paces forward and two paces back is a good rate of progress for me.

Edited by Habitat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Holmesian

I am on the road, long and meandering, and not able to tell how far along, but all the signposts I have been given have been encouraging and confirmatory of what I say. The mortal frame is frail, and three paces forward and two paces back is a good rate of progress for me.

And sincerely the very best of luck to you on your journey.

However, in the spirit of the forum in which we find ourselves, if on your view God is not rationally knowable, and if you yourself are yet to actually experience this God for yourself, then how is it you put forward so confidently what true religiousity is?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Habitat

And sincerely the very best of luck to you on your journey.

However, in the spirit of the forum in which we find ourselves, if on your view God is not rationally knowable, and if you yourself are yet to actually experience this God for yourself, then how is it you put forward so confidently what true religiousity is?

I am reluctant to say too much about my personal experiences, because it is anecdotal, liable to be seen as exaggeration or made-up, and perhaps is so baffling to me as to be not yet properly assimilated, or able to be accurately conveyed. Suffice to say my world view is altered in ways I could not have anticipated in advance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
third_eye

Whoa! Wait! This doesn't sound like the kind of God, that the OP is describing, is it? It could be just me, but the God your describing doesn't sound as omniscient as the one in the OP.

~snip

How many kind of god / gods do you care to list ?

The OP is referring to the experience of god ... the religions is referring to the recognition of its own specific identity of god ...

I am referring to the ideal of what makes them all redundant ... because a little bit of something is not all and all cannot be a little bit of itself ~

~

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Holmesian

I am reluctant to say too much about my personal experiences, because it is anecdotal, liable to be seen as exaggeration or made-up, and perhaps is so baffling to me as to be not yet properly assimilated, or able to be accurately conveyed. Suffice to say my world view is altered in ways I could not have anticipated in advance.

And that is fair enough. I respect that and won't press.

Let me explain my position. I am not convinced by most of the proponents of their version of religion and God. I am far from certain that they are all wrong although many of them are internally inconsistent and many of them are mutually exclusive. The thing is I am not anti religious in theory. Why would I not want to live forever or more importantly have my loved ones live forever? Why would I not want to achieve a higher level of enlightenment.

But if there is an all creator God then he gave me a brain to question and I intend to use it. Otherwise I am buying bridges from every cult.

So people preach to me about how right their way is. And the only thing they all have in common is how certain they all are of their mutually incompatible truths. So one simple heuristic to engage with is to look at the proponents who are advocating a belief and see if they resemble what they preach. Your last two posts to me seem closer to the abandonment of ego and hubris you profess to seek than the immovable certitude and sometimes snarkiness you displayed in earlier posts.

Edited by Holmesian
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Habitat

It is a great mystery, how could it not be. I would have to say what "progress" I have made along the path, and I do dislike that phraseology somewhat, is in inverse proportion to the effort put in. If you think you are in a chase to get somewhere, you will get nowhere. Which accords with what mystics call the 'effortless effort'. Passivity .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
eight bits

Nuke W

Not that I don't wish you luck and all, but your proposal offers no advance over revealed religion, something we already have enough of, IMO. You may recall the parable attributed to Jesus of the rich man and Lazarus (Luke 16: 19ff.), the punch line of which is the hell-broiled rich man wants Abraham to raise Lazarus to warn his still-living family. Abraham observes that if the family didn't attend to Moses and the other prophets, then why would they bother with any further communication. Why indeed?

Also, reading over your tests, your candidate proved his-her-its existence by doing something, anything at all, in response to the scientists' queries, even perhaps saying no to one or more requests. I do, therefore I am. Your continued reservation, then, is not existence, but whether it is useful to choose one ill-defined ontological category ("a god") rather than another ("space alien with a felt need to prove its superiority to a bunch of apes").

My big question is... what do YOU think a god would have to do to prove that it is, in fact, a god...

Provide an adequate explanation of why "god" is a useful ontological category for the being. Which is another way of saying that he-she-it's omni-everything-nice according to your specifications. Wouldn't it make more sense to ask him-her-it "How would you prove your divinity?" than to ask me?

I'd also be interested, but wouldn't insist, on an explanation of why a god so categorized would bother with answering my questions. I can just imagine somebody writing to any celebrity with a few questions (Dear Mr Obama, could I please have a copy of your birth certificate? Thanks so much. Oh, I am a scientist, so I am especially well qualified to read a birth certificate. Thanks again. ). Does a "god" impress you as the sort of being who'd have a lot of spare time to fetch, roll over and sit?

Edited by eight bits
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Grandpa Greenman

For me as a person to have proof of a god, he would have to come down, sit in my house, have a beer and fix me. Then I would still have all those Star Trek god episodes and movie to make me think what kind of alien is this, can I trust him and is he going to drink all my beer? :huh:

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LV-426

Have this god create something from nothing. That is the only hard and fast prerequisite for the God of creation.

My ex-girlfriend used to "create something from nothing" all the time, and I'm pretty sure it didn't denote the powers of a deity... although she would probably have disagreed :unsure:

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Habitat

My ex-girlfriend used to "create something from nothing" all the time, and I'm pretty sure it didn't denote the powers of a deity... although she would probably have disagreed :unsure:

OMG !!!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Stubbly_Dooright

For me as a person to have proof of a god, he would have to come down, sit in my house, have a beer and fix me. Then I would still have all those Star Trek god episodes and movie to make me think what kind of alien is this, can I trust him and is he going to drink all my beer? :huh:

That Apollo episode certain brought ideas, didn't it? ;)
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Stubbly_Dooright

How many kind of god / gods do you care to list ?

The OP is referring to the experience of god ... the religions is referring to the recognition of its own specific identity of god ...

I am referring to the ideal of what makes them all redundant ... because a little bit of something is not all and all cannot be a little bit of itself ~

~

Ok ok, I got ya. But doesn't that make it more ambiguous? It gets a little more confusing, and now we all can't be sure.

Or is that just me? :o

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DieChecker

First of all I should like to mention that I in no way, shape, or form subscribe to any religion or particular sense of spirituality (this is not exactly relevant); at best I would consider myself a pantheist or, as Richard Dawkins so eloquently defines a "pantheist", a "sexed up atheist"... I prefer the latter, just because. ;)

Before writing this out further I should also like to address that this post makes the following assumption:

1.) it assumes that we live in a universe that is governed by a "god"--an all knowing, all-powerful, all-present being who very much interacts with our daily lives.

2.) it assumes that this "god" possesses the capacity to prove its existence to any individual and is able to perform virtually any required task as science needs in order to prove its existence.

......

My big question is... what do YOU think a god would have to do to prove that it is, in fact, a god... in particular in the realm of science? It would be exceptionally difficult (if not impossible) to do.

So the problem I see is that whatever abilities one can ascribe to God, could also be ascribed to a vastly superior alien being. Any thing one might think could be evidence... telling the future... teleportation.... telepathy.... telekinetics... energy maniplation... matter manipulation... time travel.... could all also be deduced to be generated by a vastly superior technology.

Thus you could not proof to a true skeptic that God is real, even if they had God standing there right in front of them.

If such a being did exist, and did show up. We'd have to deduce that God, in actuality, WAS this alien, and everything that we ascribed to supernatural origins was really technology. Which puts a new spin on religion, but doesn't really affect the foundations of it. Other then now there would be a real physical representation of God.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Grandpa Greenman

That Apollo episode certain brought ideas, didn't it? ;)

Yes it did, I best hide the beer.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GlitterRose

You must become the vehicle that carries you to this truth. You must go to the mountain top, it will not come to you. If you ditch the baggage of largely egocentric illusions, you will float like a butterfly to the peak.

Some might venture to say that it's a largely egocentric illusion that you have the answers.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GlitterRose

Darkness, deepest darkness, is where the real progress is made. Holding out hope that reason can light this pathway, is all in vain.

Yes, absolutely. The path to enlightenment is to forego all reason. A true God would expect nothing less of us.

That's actually sarcasm, just to clarify.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.