Why doesn't god prove himself?

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.

Re: Why doesn't god prove himself?

Post Number:#46  Postby Mr. Pragmatism » July 15th, 2009, 10:35 am

ape wrote:God does and must prove that he exists since, based on his own Golden Rules, he calls on all humans to prove all things, one of which things would include God's existence.


So,you are saying god exists because he tells people to prove all things, including his existence, therefore god exists? This is a tautology because it presupposes as true the very thing it is asked to prove.

God exists-> Because he tells people to prove all things-> One thing is god-> Therefore, god exists?

Do you see the big circle you just talked in?



YSM wrote:God is good and everything He does is good, and our God has created beings like us who have a free will. We can either use His gift to ally ourselves with Him, or we can use it to become His enemies; in other words, we are free to oppose Him and thus create evil. It is true that God could force us to abide by His Moral Law always and to love Him, etc., but then we would be mere automatons and our love meaningless. True goodness and love cannot be born from force.
If god is omniscient, he already knows what you are going to do before you are even created. This calls the concept of free will into question.
Mr. Pragmatism
 
Posts: 82 (View: All / In topic)

Joined: July 10th, 2009, 4:41 pm

Re: Why doesn't god prove himself?



Become a member for less ads

Already a member? Login
 

Post Number:#47  Postby Alun » July 15th, 2009, 4:20 pm

If God proved Himself to us, then we wouldn't be human. If you saw angels on a daily basis and a giant glowing hand occasionally stopped terrorist attacks, saved babies, and spooned away flood waters, you would not have proof of an omnipotent God. Omnipotence means power over the entire universe; time, matter, space, imagination, and logic. God would defy our very logical capacities by making us know He was real; at that point, we'd clearly be something other than we are now.

Also, I think faith is a much stronger character developing tool, don't you? :wink:
"I have nothing new to teach the world" -Mohandas "Mahatma" Gandhi
User avatar
Alun
 
Posts: 1118 (View: All / In topic)

Joined: July 11th, 2009, 8:55 pm

Post Number:#48  Postby Belinda » July 16th, 2009, 5:28 am

I don't understand why you winked, alun. Faith does indeed underly the particular myth we choose or feel to live by. I mean, of course, 'myth' in the sense of underlying explanation for one's life, for instance the myth that a heavenly being plans it all, or the myth that all is necessarily so, or the myth that science can progress to greater and greater knowledge of truth. And so on.

We may choose to believe that the feeling that nothing makes absolute objective sense yields the truth that nothing is worthy. This too is a myth of the sort that I am trying to describe and also rests upon an attitude of faith.

And I do mean by 'faith' an attitude, not a system of beliefs such as a religion is.
Belinda
Contributor
 
Posts: 13836 (View: All / In topic)

Joined: July 10th, 2008, 7:02 pm
Location: UK

Post Number:#49  Postby Martin Ekdahl » July 16th, 2009, 9:31 am

Simon says... wrote:he doesn't because god is neither nessesarily existing, or observable...he is the result of pure speculation...


Yup! But anyway, all speculation is based on something. I don't believe that religion has the necessary answers, but I'm also a doubting Thomas to hardcore atheism.
"The meaning with life must be to do something meaningful with your life".
User avatar
Martin Ekdahl
 
Posts: 245 (View: All / In topic)

Joined: November 30th, 2008, 11:01 am
Location: Rostock

Post Number:#50  Postby ontologic_conceptualist » July 16th, 2009, 9:51 am

I did not feel like going back 4 pages to read every post so forgive me if this has been already stated...

If God explained & prooved everything he did, would that not defeat the whole concept of 'FAITH'?
Who I Am Is What I Am
What I Am Is Why I Am
Why I Am IS Who I Am...

The question you should be asking is...who are you?
User avatar
ontologic_conceptualist
 
Posts: 518 (View: All / In topic)

Joined: April 3rd, 2009, 9:59 am
Location: Mobile, Alabama

Post Number:#51  Postby Mr. Pragmatism » July 16th, 2009, 11:20 am

Why is faith a prerequisite for dealings with a god? Because some text told us so? Its a bit self-referential.
Mr. Pragmatism
 
Posts: 82 (View: All / In topic)

Joined: July 10th, 2009, 4:41 pm

Post Number:#52  Postby ape » July 16th, 2009, 12:19 pm

[quote="Mr. Pragmatism"]Why is faith a prerequisite for dealings with a god?
Ape: Faith is not a prerequisite for dealings with God.
Love is..since God is Love and Love is God.
John 1:1. 1 John 4:8.
And because faith and doubt both work by Love, Galatians 5:6, it can also be truly and undoubtedly said that without faith and without doubt it is impossible to please God, when it really means without Love it is impossible to please or to know or to obey or have faith in or have doubt in God.
Love carries its own faith which is ever-faithful, and carries its own doubt which is undutiable.
1 Corinthians 13:2.
1 John 4:7-8.
And with faith in Love, we can have faith in God or have doubt in God!
When doubt is in Love, doubt is still in good faith!
Would you love me to continue this Love-theme to re-prove that there is more faith in genuine doubt than most creeds of science allow?:)
We may doubt that the stars are fire and doubt that truth be a liar, and doubt the sun is above, but I always doubt Love in Love!:) A la Shakespeare.
Mr. P:
Because some text told us so?
Ape: No, because it stands to the text and texture and context of contextual Reason:
without Love, all is fake fake:
without Love, we can't even be real fakes:
we can only be fake fakes!
;)
With Love, even fakes are real, and we can be and are real fakes!
With Love, we are loving to be real: we are not real to Love: and Love is the only and the real reality as per Carole King!
Mr.P:
Its a bit self-referential.
ape: Actually, it is Love which is self-referential and self-definitional and self-sufficiential and self-relational and self-absolutional. This is so simply because Love is self-lovutional and self-revolutional which is because Love loves itself, loves itself as all other words and loves all other words as itself. This Love of self also makes Love the Relative Absolute and the Absolute Relative: absolutely relative and relatively absolute!
May I continue?:)
Your wish is my command!:)
Last edited by ape on July 16th, 2009, 12:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.
ape
 
Posts: 3323 (View: All / In topic)

Joined: April 6th, 2009, 9:55 pm

Post Number:#53  Postby Mr. Pragmatism » July 16th, 2009, 12:29 pm

Sometimes I think you type as much nonsensical phrases as possible and just hope people don't pay too close attention to what you write.

And because faith and doubt both work by Love, Galatians 5:6, it can also be truly and undoubtedly said that without faith and without doubt it is impossible to please God when it really means without Love it is impossible to please or to know or to obey or have faith in or have doubt in God.
How does referencing the bible in any way prove or disprove the existence of god? I have seen you use this type of tactic several times, and I still struggle how you attempt to use as evidence one of the very things being debated.

No because it stands to reason: without Love, all is fake fake: without Love, we can't even be real fakes: we can only be fake fakes! Wink

This is nonsensical. What is a fake fake? What is a real fake? I have this feeling like I'm being trolled.

Actually, it is Love which is self-referential and self-definitional and self-sufficiential and self-relational and self-absolutional. This is so simply because Love is self-lovutional and self-revolutional which is because Love loves itself, loves itself as all other words and loves all other words as itself.

Seriously, what are you talking about? What is self-lovutional? Love does not love itself, love is a concept, not a being. Are you high?
Mr. Pragmatism
 
Posts: 82 (View: All / In topic)

Joined: July 10th, 2009, 4:41 pm

Post Number:#54  Postby ape » July 16th, 2009, 1:22 pm

[quote="Mr. Pragmatism"]Sometimes I think you type as much nonsensical phrases as possible and just hope people don't pay too close attention to what you write.
Ape: :) As my wife says to me in Love, so in Love I say to you:
See what happens when you think?!:)
Did you know there is sense in nonsense, and that that fact proves language had to have been invented by a God?:idea:
Mr. P:How does referencing the bible in any way prove or disprove the existence of god?
Ape: It doesn't!
It's just a philosophy of spirituality reference or a spirituality of philosophy reference to see what is your p-reference::) spinoza or wittgenstein or hesse or bible or bohr or einstein or shelley or shakespeare or heisenberg or john archibald wheeler or--, see what I am referencing?:)
Mr.P: I have seen you use this type of tactic several times, and I still struggle how you attempt to use as evidence one of the very things being debated.
Ape: Simply because the answer is most always in the same mouth that asks the question, the evidence is mostly always hidden in plain sight. Ever looked for your spectacles everywhere else but where they they were: on your own head? Cdn't find them, huh?
Mr.P:
This is nonsensical.
Ape: I do see sense in what is nonsense to you! Do you get any meaning from what is meaning less?:idea:
Mr.P: What is a fake fake? What is a real fake?
Ape:
Hmmm are you saying that you have never faked it till you maked(made) it?:)
A fake fake is the person who hates fakes and fakers and so does not realise he too is a fake, an actor, a hypocrite as we all are! What makes us real is Love, what makes words have meaning is Love, so what makes fakes real is Love.
Are you a fake? I am.
Mr.P:I have this feeling like I'm being trolled.
Ape: You really mean you have this intuitive feeling that you are pa-trolling yourself for the proper premise in thinking all your thoughts, and being asked by your autonomic-neuro-control to con-trol yourself for the proper axiom for all your words!:)
Mr.P: Seriously, what are you talking about? What is self-lovutional?
Ape: Love loving itself means that Love revolves or goes around or orbits or circled itself and so is self-revolving or self-revolutionary or self-revolutional! From there, it is a simple step to see and for the mint of my mind to coin, that Love can be said to be Love-utional or lovutional, which when said aloud sounds like 'Love you tional!':)
Mr.P:
Love does not love itself, love is a concept, not a being.
Ape:
Love is the only word that loves itself and all other words. See Shakespeare.
Love is both a noun and a subject and a verb and an object: Love loves itself so all others can! That's WS again!
And when we use the figure of speech called Personification, Love is a being, such as 'Love is kind, Love is patient,' and as such is the Being that was in the beginning with God, and is both the spirit of the mind of God and the God that God worships!:)
Wd love to refer you to where all that was also said about 2000 years ago!
Mr.P:
Are you high?
Ape:
Very perceptive, Mr.P!
I am always high on the Divine Wine of the Vine of Love!:)
Want some?;)
Love in this differs from clay: that to share and divide is not to take away!
PBShelley.
Plus, I am actually at this very moment sitting is the midst of a voluptuous garden of flowers and trees and birds and a lake with springs of water gushing forth in endless re-volu-tion, full of lazily swimming fish, with the waft of the gentlest of breezes taking glancing blows at my cheeks,--so I am doubly high!:)
God asked me to tell you 'Hi.':)
Fortunately, this Love-intoxication or God-inebriation keeps one permanently high, leaves no hangover, and from what I hear here there and everywhere, there is no cure for being addicted to Love and for being madly in Love!:). To me it is amazing that when we are IN Love, Love is also IN us as when we are full of Love!
What say you, Mr.P?
Last edited by ape on July 16th, 2009, 6:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.
ape
 
Posts: 3323 (View: All / In topic)

Joined: April 6th, 2009, 9:55 pm

Post Number:#55  Postby Mr. Pragmatism » July 16th, 2009, 1:33 pm

ape wrote:What say you, Mr.P?
I say that I now realize that I am being trolled, and politely back away from the thread.
Mr. Pragmatism
 
Posts: 82 (View: All / In topic)

Joined: July 10th, 2009, 4:41 pm

Post Number:#56  Postby Juice » July 16th, 2009, 1:47 pm

If God showed up tomorrow and stopped a Tsunami from killing hundreds maybe thousands, 40% of the people (most in China) will insist He is an alien.

If He showed up and announced His Being every agent in Hollywood would look to sign Him, every lawyer would file suit against Him for some reason or another. Every church would suddenly be filled to capacity. Wars would start whether or not He called himself Jehovah or Allah.

You want me to prove that God exists, I say go ahead and create something that doesn't.
When everyone looks to better their own future then the future will be better for everyone.

An explanation of cause is not a justification by reason.
C. S. Lewis

Fight the illusion!
User avatar
Juice
 
Posts: 1997 (View: All / In topic)

Joined: May 8th, 2009, 10:24 pm

Post Number:#57  Postby ontologic_conceptualist » July 16th, 2009, 2:14 pm

If God showed up & stopped a Tsunami in person in front of everybody, I'd bet 75% of Christians would deny it was actually him, "That's Not How God Works", "God Has A Plan" ect. then yah, some alien theories galore, but very few would actually believe it was "The Man(God)Himself" especially if he claimed it, then people would be, "That MUST be Lucifer !!!"
Who I Am Is What I Am
What I Am Is Why I Am
Why I Am IS Who I Am...

The question you should be asking is...who are you?
User avatar
ontologic_conceptualist
 
Posts: 518 (View: All / In topic)

Joined: April 3rd, 2009, 9:59 am
Location: Mobile, Alabama

Post Number:#58  Postby Juice » July 16th, 2009, 2:36 pm

OC-I am only responding to the original OP as secularly as possible given the fact that even to ask the question is a clear example of where the answer is.
When everyone looks to better their own future then the future will be better for everyone.

An explanation of cause is not a justification by reason.
C. S. Lewis

Fight the illusion!
User avatar
Juice
 
Posts: 1997 (View: All / In topic)

Joined: May 8th, 2009, 10:24 pm

Re: Why doesn't god prove himself?

Post Number:#59  Postby ape » July 16th, 2009, 6:22 pm

[quote="Mr. Pragmatism"]
So,you are saying god exists because he tells people to prove all things, including his existence, therefore god exists?
Ape: No. Independent of God calling on us to prove it, I have already proved God's existence based on the word Love loving all words and their opposites!:)
Mr.P:This is a tautology because it presupposes as true the very thing it is asked to prove.
Ape: That wd be true if God's existence were not independently proved by other means.
Mr.P: Do you see the big circle you just talked in?
Ape: I do see the circle that you see that I am talking in! But that circle is included in and based on the bigger circle of Love that I am in!:)
Love and I have the wit to win:
We draw the circle of Love and include all in!
Do you see that bigger circle of Love that I just talked in?:)
ape
 
Posts: 3323 (View: All / In topic)

Joined: April 6th, 2009, 9:55 pm

Post Number:#60  Postby ape » July 16th, 2009, 6:54 pm

Mr. Pragmatism wrote:
ape wrote:What say you, Mr.P?
I say that I now realize that I am being trolled,
Ape:
Do you realise that it takes one to know one?
So that you are really being pa-trolled by you?
Now, I know that because a person is paranoid does not mean he is not being pa-trolled. But believe me, I love and respect you and treasure the convo too much to do that to you.
You can do a self-check to see what kind of troll you are to yourself and others: do you love or hate trolls? Hating trolls wd mean that you give you a hard time. Trolls who love trolls don't matter: those are the good trolls.
Mr.P:
...and politely back away from the thread.
Ape:
Thank you for your politeness such as it is.
You can take it to a higher level of genuinity if you love yourself as impolite and as a troll so that, in that Love and Respect your politeness wd be real and not fake when you are polite to those whom you think are trolls.:idea:
Now, please don't be shy: let's converso when you feel like it! I do admit I can be overwhelming with all this talk about Love and Respect.
ape
 
Posts: 3323 (View: All / In topic)

Joined: April 6th, 2009, 9:55 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Philosophy of Religion, Theism and Mythology

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ranvier, Spectrum, Speedyj1992 and 7 guests

Philosophy Trophies

Most Active Members
by posts made in lasts 30 days

Avatar Member Name Recent Posts
Greta 162
Fooloso4 116
Renee 107
Ormond 97
Felix 90

Last updated January 6, 2017, 6:28 pm EST

Most Active Book of the Month Participants
by book of the month posts

Avatar Member Name BOTM Posts
Scott 147
Spectrum 23
Belinda 23
whitetrshsoldier 20
Josefina1110 19
Last updated January 6, 2017, 6:28 pm EST