Proof of God

Discuss philosophical questions regarding theism (and atheism), and discuss religion as it relates to philosophy. This includes any philosophical discussions that happen to be about god, gods, or a 'higher power' or the belief of them. This also generally includes philosophical topics about organized or ritualistic mysticism or about organized, common or ritualistic beliefs in the existence of supernatural phenomenon.
Post Reply
Belindi
Moderator
Posts: 1453
Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm

Re: Proof of God

Post by Belindi » July 4th, 2018, 12:36 pm

Newme wrote:
Maybe you ought to tell all of the Christians that Jesus wasn’t talking to them - only to those who abided by the law of Moses.
I can't turn anybody into a Biblical scholar. I would say, and I do in fact wonder if you can understand the following. The historical Jesus was a first century Jew who never spoke to anyone two thousand years after he died. The iconic Christ of faith was largely a construction by Paul. The editors of The Bible decided what was canonical as they thought fit.

Christians who think Jesus was talking to them confuse the historical Jesus with the Christ of faith. This confusion is bad for the future of Christianity.
The iconic Christ must move with the times.

Belindi
Moderator
Posts: 1453
Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm

Re: Proof of God

Post by Belindi » July 4th, 2018, 12:38 pm

“I believe in the sun, even when it's not shining.
I believe in love, even when I don't feel it.
I believe in God, even when He is silent.”

Pollyanna lives.

User avatar
Newme
Posts: 1155
Joined: December 13th, 2011, 1:21 am

Re: Proof of God

Post by Newme » July 5th, 2018, 8:47 pm

Belindi wrote:
July 4th, 2018, 12:36 pm
Newme wrote:
Maybe you ought to tell all of the Christians that Jesus wasn’t talking to them - only to those who abided by the law of Moses.
I can't turn anybody into a Biblical scholar. I would say, and I do in fact wonder if you can understand the following. The historical Jesus was a first century Jew who never spoke to anyone two thousand years after he died. The iconic Christ of faith was largely a construction by Paul. The editors of The Bible decided what was canonical as they thought fit.

Christians who think Jesus was talking to them confuse the historical Jesus with the Christ of faith. This confusion is bad for the future of Christianity.
The iconic Christ must move with the times.
It seems we can agree that Christ was not Jesus’s last name but an ideal. Hopefully you can understand that Jesus lived and taught more principles of Buddhism than of Judaism. It’s weird because it’s so incorrect, that you claim Jesus was speaking of the kingdom of God ONLY in Jews living Judaism when he was constantly calling them out on their deception, hypocrisy etc...

Matthew 23:
“23 Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples,

2 Saying The scribes and the Pharisees [judaic leaders] sit in Moses' seat:
3 All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.
4 For they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers.
5 But all their works they do for to be seen of men: they make broad their phylacteries, and enlarge the borders of their garments,
6 And love the uppermost rooms at feasts, and the chief seats in the synagogues,

7 And greetings in the markets, and to be called of men, Rabbi, Rabbi.
8 But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren.
9 And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.
10 Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ.
11 But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant.
12 And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased; and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted.

13 But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in.

14 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye devour widows' houses, and for a pretence make long prayer: therefore ye shall receive the greater damnation.

15 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves.

16 Woe unto you, ye blind guides, which say, Whosoever shall swear by the temple, it is nothing; but whosoever shall swear by the gold of the temple, he is a debtor!
17 Ye fools and blind: for whether is greater, the gold, or the temple that sanctifieth the gold?
18 And, Whosoever shall swear by the altar, it is nothing; but whosoever sweareth by the gift that is upon it, he is guilty.

19 Ye fools and blind: for whether is greater, the gift, or the altar that sanctifieth the gift?
20 Whoso therefore shall swear by the altar, sweareth by it, and by all things thereon.
21 And whoso shall swear by the temple, sweareth by it, and by him that dwelleth therein.
22 And he that shall swear by heaven, sweareth by the throne of God, and by him that sitteth thereon.

23 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.
24 Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel.

25 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye make clean the outside of the cup and of the platter, but within they are full of extortion and excess.
26 Thou blind Pharisee, cleanse first that which is within the cup and platter, that the outside of them may be clean also.

27 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness.
28 Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity.”


Maybe Jesus saw the insanity of killing just for disobeying parents or for breaking the sabbath... and other extreme genocidal prejudice Jews had against anyone not Jewish.

Belindi
Moderator
Posts: 1453
Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm

Re: Proof of God

Post by Belindi » July 6th, 2018, 3:16 am

Newme, each of those quotations that you provided mean to me that in a time of Roman occupation and colonisation Jesus was preaching the spirit of Judaism , traditional Jewish morality, as against those Jews who were adapting Judaism to make it harmonise with the conquerors.

User avatar
Greta
Site Admin
Posts: 7127
Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm

Re: Proof of God

Post by Greta » July 6th, 2018, 3:45 am

One can maybe prove it to oneself, but whether others believe others' internal proofs or not is another matter. In fact, whether apparent subjective proofs are good enough for ourselves is another matter again.

Ultimately a person's conduct will either tend to verify or undermine their claims of sensing God/spirits or not. I've felt God before, I think. It was extraordinary and a blast. At the time I had absolutely no doubt that I'd been in touch with something extraordinary.

Later on, I couldn't help wondering if it was just all in my head, maybe a lucky rush of dopamine. I'm not sure whether it matters whether I interpret the peak experience as being (somewhat) in touch with God, a rush of dopamine or inhabited by the spirit of Cleopatra :) The experience was what it was - very, very cool and helpful. No matter how I interpret it, I have no intention of trying to repeat it. It was completely spontaneous at the time and I suspect any conscious attempt to achieve that state again would be undermined by that attempt.

Finding spirituality is like finding relationships. One can essentially be a yawning pit of need looking for someone to fill that hole. Or we can get on with our lives and accept love if a compatible other turns up. Same with God, Allah or other deities. Does God exactly fit the yarning pit of need within you or do you prefer to left room in your heart for [whatever is fine] to turn up if, to paraphrase Vonnegut, if the accident will.

User avatar
Newme
Posts: 1155
Joined: December 13th, 2011, 1:21 am

Re: Proof of God

Post by Newme » July 7th, 2018, 8:34 pm

Belindi wrote:
July 6th, 2018, 3:16 am
Newme, each of those quotations that you provided mean to me that in a time of Roman occupation and colonisation Jesus was preaching the spirit of Judaism , traditional Jewish morality, as against those Jews who were adapting Judaism to make it harmonise with the conquerors.
No, those scriptures, Jesus never addressed Roman government officials, but he did specifically address Jewish leaders as “Rabbi, Pharisees, Scribes” as hypocrites etc.

Getting back to the main point... “the kingdom (realm/experience) is within” each of us. This is axiomatic - and universal, yet also personal. So while I can say, there is the experience of God, like Love (which God is defined as in the bible), I cannot prove to you my experience of God, nor can you prove your experience of God, because it’s personal.

Belindi
Moderator
Posts: 1453
Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm

Re: Proof of God

Post by Belindi » July 8th, 2018, 3:32 am

Newme wrote:
No, those scriptures, Jesus never addressed Roman government officials, but he did specifically address Jewish leaders as “Rabbi, Pharisees, Scribes” as hypocrites etc.
That's true , and it goes along with my point that Jesus was concerned with Jewish morality. Jewish morality must survive alongside Caesar. And Jewish morality must also rule against the money changing in the Temple.

What we can do with these stories of Jesus is , not deny that Jesus was speaking only to his contemporaries ,but take from Jesus' stroppy faithfulness to Judaism that we have to actively strive for righteousness.

User avatar
Newme
Posts: 1155
Joined: December 13th, 2011, 1:21 am

Re: Proof of God

Post by Newme » July 8th, 2018, 1:59 pm

We can agree that Jesus built on what everyone around him knew - Judaism. Yet, he often pointed out dysfunctional/evil aspects of Judaism and suggested people not to be as Jewish leaders. He called them out so much that the Jewish leaders finally had him captured, tortured and crucified. Jesus’s concern with Jewish morality was not to obey it but to criticize how they were living by the letter of the law while neglecting the spirit of the law.

“Without a parable spake he [Jesus] not unto them.” Parables can be taken literally (by the letter) or spiritually - symbolically. Jesus whipping money changers out of the temple can mean it’s wrong to use religion to make money. The body is a temple of God - so it can also be interpreted as it’s not GOoD to prioritize money... One needs to whip such desires out of one’s heart. “For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.”

User avatar
Greta
Site Admin
Posts: 7127
Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm

Re: Proof of God

Post by Greta » July 8th, 2018, 7:53 pm

Newme wrote:
July 8th, 2018, 1:59 pm
We can agree that Jesus built on what everyone around him knew - Judaism. Yet, he often pointed out dysfunctional/evil aspects of Judaism and suggested people not to be as Jewish leaders. He called them out so much that the Jewish leaders finally had him captured, tortured and crucified. Jesus’s concern with Jewish morality was not to obey it but to criticize how they were living by the letter of the law while neglecting the spirit of the law.
Is it just me or does modern day Christendom seem to have much more in common with the ideas of the Pharisees than of Jesus? Where is the room for concern for the poor, sick and oppressed when the main concerns seem to be fear of Muslims, and anti views regarding gun regulation, women's rights, the rights of queer people, abortion, euthanasia and - incredibly- welfare and community work.

If everyone must fend for themselves to sustain the illusion of a level playing field, where does charity, love and mercy come in? I appreciate the issues with welfare cycles, but surely those subscribing to the kind of passion attributed to Jesus would be seeking a middle ground that provides safety nets for the impoverished and encouragement for those who need a nudge?

User avatar
Newme
Posts: 1155
Joined: December 13th, 2011, 1:21 am

Re: Proof of God

Post by Newme » July 8th, 2018, 8:47 pm

Greta,
First off, I appreciate that religion, Christianity specifically, offers a lot of good - especially a sense of community and striving to live better. Yet, 2 problems they have are financial greed and not sharing tithes with the poor, despite Deut. 14:28-29 saying that 1/3 of tithes are supposed to go to the poor. I don’t know of any church that obeys that. Jesus never specified an amount to give but suggested that the law of moses was the lower law and if we could give more to do so. Ie Jesus told a rich guy to sell all he had and give it all to the poor and follow Christ.

I could go on and on about this - just know I agree whole heartedly that many - especially Christian leaders of rich churches - are very comparable to the criticisms Jesus aimed toward Jewish leaders.

Some parts you mentioned I disagree with.
I believe...
1) Ripping babies bodies apart in genocide based on age discrimination (abortion) disguised as “womens rights” is cruel and unusual punishment. By 8 weeks gestation all body systems are intact whifh means by the time many abortions are carried out the child can feel the pain of being ripped apart limb by limb. In the USA, rights are not given by government but are “endowed by our Creator.”

2) 2nd ammendment rights are there for a reason. Law abiding citizens being disarmed when law-breaking citizens/governments are armed encourages bad-intended people to rule.

3) Having a “special” type of sexual disorder, like homosexuality, is not reason to have special rights. According to the US CDC statistical health reports, those (especially men) practicing homosexuality have extremely high rates of STDs, HIV/AIDs, mental illness and drug abuse. Anal sex risks include anal fissures, anal cancer, colon rupture & bacterial infection. Ex-homosexual and ex “gay rights” leader Michael Glatz said, “Homosexuality is death and I choose life.” Government ignored the democratic vote - most people voted for marriage to remain as a man and a woman. Instead a DECREE of “homosexual marriage” was made despite that marriage is not part of the constitution. Why? At least partly because they want to reduce the population. They also want to appear “nice” rather than “bigoted, homophobic haters” based on manipulative psycho-tactics in propaganda like “The Overhauling of Straight America” and “After the Ball.”

We might agree that the bible has some crazy ideas, but I see some truth in there too.
*It suggests “thou shalt not kill” - pretty good advice.

*There’s a lot of talk about the need to protect oneself. Jesus said to turn the other cheek but often you can only successfully do that without getting killed if you have a “sheathed sword.” The original word meaning for “meek” (as in Jesus’s beattitudes “blessed are the meek”) was “sheath sword” which means you have a sword if you needed to use it but you keep it covered unless for defense, not offense.

*The bible also warns against homosexuality pretty plainly. Doctors also warn of anal sex risks. Statistics warn that homosexuality leads to sickness and premature death. So it seems the bible - despite being written so long ago - was correct in warning against homosexuality.

User avatar
Greta
Site Admin
Posts: 7127
Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm

Re: Proof of God

Post by Greta » July 9th, 2018, 12:40 am

Greta wrote:
July 8th, 2018, 7:53 pm
Is it just me or does modern day Christendom seem to have much more in common with the ideas of the Pharisees than of Jesus? Where is the room for concern for the poor, sick and oppressed when the main concerns seem to be fear of Muslims, and anti views regarding gun regulation, women's rights, the rights of queer people, abortion, euthanasia and - incredibly- welfare and community work.

If everyone must fend for themselves to sustain the illusion of a level playing field, where does charity, love and mercy come in? I appreciate the issues with welfare cycles, but surely those subscribing to the kind of passion attributed to Jesus would be seeking a middle ground that provides safety nets for the impoverished and encouragement for those who need a nudge?
Newme wrote:
July 8th, 2018, 8:47 pm
Greta,
First off, I appreciate that religion, Christianity specifically, offers a lot of good - especially a sense of community and striving to live better. Yet, 2 problems they have are financial greed and not sharing tithes with the poor, despite Deut. 14:28-29 saying that 1/3 of tithes are supposed to go to the poor. I don’t know of any church that obeys that. Jesus never specified an amount to give but suggested that the law of moses was the lower law and if we could give more to do so. Ie Jesus told a rich guy to sell all he had and give it all to the poor and follow Christ.

I could go on and on about this - just know I agree whole heartedly that many - especially Christian leaders of rich churches - are very comparable to the criticisms Jesus aimed toward Jewish leaders.

[our disagreements]

We might agree that the bible has some crazy ideas, but I see some truth in there too.
*It suggests “thou shalt not kill” - pretty good advice.

*There’s a lot of talk about the need to protect oneself. Jesus said to turn the other cheek but often you can only successfully do that without getting killed if you have a “sheathed sword.” The original word meaning for “meek” (as in Jesus’s beattitudes “blessed are the meek”) was “sheath sword” which means you have a sword if you needed to use it but you keep it covered unless for defense, not offense.
Never the twain shall meet on our disagreements regarding care about the supposed sentience of unformed blobs of living tissue (while happily chomping on the carcasses of once-sentient animals), or on the ongoing disaster of US gun laws, or the rights of people to be themselves as long as they aren't hurting anyone etc.

Fortunately they are not the subject of this thread and can be treated as a given and now left alone. Yes, we disagree on these. Nor am I interested in the supposed "good" that religions have done in history - it's obvious and well enough known and acknowledged, often to the point of being overplayed in light of religion's divisive and dysfunctional aspects.

Let's look at where we may actually agree a little.

Jesus was supposed to be about empathy, compassion and kindness and that is very obviously not the message coming from the great religions. The message, rather, is now purely political - aligned with neoconservative causes, and nothing else. This is going to cause some consternation for social conservatives who nonetheless don't believe that the "poor had it coming" or "deserve all they get", who actually care somewhat about other human beings and the kind of environment we will leave the next generations.

Does anyone think we are heading in a direction that will make for a better world for our grandchilden??

Where are the churches in speaking out for the oppressed and poor, or those who cannot speak for themselves? Or for those who are not on a level playing field but damned as if they were? Quiet. Very quiet.

But churches like talking about young non-chaste women and queers - like a pet cat, they are easy to kick without repercussions. Not so easy when dealing with mega corporations capable of making life very difficult for critics.

The churches use ordinary secular people who don't happen to fit their Abrahamic norms to demonise and galvanise the flock - but to what purpose if the church won't speak out about by far the biggest issues that Jesus spoke about? Seemingly the game is played for power itself rather than to achieve the true aims of the religion's exemplar.

If churches are that cynical about it all, why should anyone else accept their spurious so-called proofs of God's existence? It's clear from their conduct that they don't seem to believe the scriptures themselves - or they would take them seriously. Religion is increasingly looking to me like a badge to wear than what it claims to be.

Jaded Sage
Posts: 42
Joined: December 15th, 2014, 4:45 am

Re: Proof of God

Post by Jaded Sage » July 30th, 2018, 8:46 am

TigerNinja wrote:
February 27th, 2018, 5:40 pm
Jaded Sage wrote:
August 27th, 2015, 10:45 am
1 John 4:8 defines God as love, so God is love.

If love exists, then God exists. Love exists, therefore God exists.

Love ≡ God Love ∴ God

JSfjaoijdaklfheoia=Ice cream, so JSfjaoijdaklfheoia clearly exists. You see the fallacy? It requires a priori of God, however there is no significant and quantifiable priori that can be experienced by everyone that is able to say "God=love". You have not met the conditions whereby one can clearly say in pretense that God really is equal to love, however you are still leaning on that as your premise which founds your line of argument. For the lack of validity present with the premise, the line of argument collapses.
That’s not a fallacy.

User avatar
ThomasHobbes
Posts: 925
Joined: May 5th, 2018, 5:53 pm

Re: Proof of God

Post by ThomasHobbes » July 30th, 2018, 4:17 pm

Jaded Sage wrote:
July 30th, 2018, 8:46 am
TigerNinja wrote:
February 27th, 2018, 5:40 pm


JSfjaoijdaklfheoia=Ice cream, so JSfjaoijdaklfheoia clearly exists. You see the fallacy? It requires a priori of God, however there is no significant and quantifiable priori that can be experienced by everyone that is able to say "God=love". You have not met the conditions whereby one can clearly say in pretense that God really is equal to love, however you are still leaning on that as your premise which founds your line of argument. For the lack of validity present with the premise, the line of argument collapses.
That’s not a fallacy.
It's an unsubstantiated assertion based on a false attribution.
Dog is love
love exists
therefore dog exists.

Replace 'dog' with Jabberwocky

Jaded Sage
Posts: 42
Joined: December 15th, 2014, 4:45 am

Re: Proof of God

Post by Jaded Sage » August 1st, 2018, 3:28 pm

That logical form holds.

Post Reply