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
User avatar
jerlands
Posts: 431
Joined: December 12th, 2017, 10:56 pm

Re: Proof of God

Post by jerlands »

Spectrum wrote: March 9th, 2018, 1:37 am God has not be proven to been real within an empirical-rational reality, so it has to be idealized and reified. How else?
So it is you who is speculating!
Spectrum wrote: March 7th, 2018, 10:33 pm P1. Absolute perfection is an impossibility within an empirical-rational reality.
P2. God, imperatively must be absolutely perfect
C. Therefore God is an impossibility.
Here's the gist of the issue presented in your expression...

The definition of absolute is "not diminished in any way." Can you see the problem putting the notion of God within that framework so that it might be comprehensible.
The definition of perfection is "the condition, state, or quality of being free or as free as possible from all flaws or defects." The other problem in your premise is man has to perceive perfection to perceive God.

So, your two qualifiers "absolute perfection" as a definition of God are both somewhat incomprensible to common man.

"It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so." - Mark Twain
Spectrum
Posts: 5161
Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various

Re: Proof of God

Post by Spectrum »

jerlands wrote: March 9th, 2018, 7:01 pm
Spectrum wrote: March 9th, 2018, 1:37 am
DNA wise all humans are mortal.
DNA wise all humans will and are aware of their mortality.
Since ALL humans do not want to die prematurely, the awareness of one's inevitable mortality created a cognitive dissonance which generate an existential crisis at the subliminal level -an internal psychological turmoil.
This is a perspective I hear echoed by others on this board. That the situation creates the reality or what you claim creates the fantasy which is the compensating component for what they're experiencing. I see that as blatantly wrong.
You are just making a straw man and claiming your own view is blatantly wrong.
I don't think you understand the point and I cannot understand your point re 'That the situation.."
Can you counter why the points I raised do not create a psychological turmoil within your psyche?

Spectrum wrote: March 9th, 2018, 1:37 am This is why the critical element within theism and religion is about the after-life and that is what your Egyptian pyramids are centered on.
Yes, Life after death is very much about the future.
My point is why are theists so concern with the after-life when there is no such proofs of its reality. Why?

Spectrum wrote: March 9th, 2018, 1:37 am
How can you insist so positively of God when you have not even prove it exists as real.
There's enough proof in the world in and through men that speak to me.
Where is your proofs that a God exists within the empirical-rational reality.
Other than reason and empirical-rational reality, what other mode of reality can you prove a God exists?

Note the evident existence of the things in the Universe prove the realness of those things in the Universe but it does not follow a God exists and created those things.
Why you are making such a claim is due to your psychology.
Spectrum wrote: March 9th, 2018, 1:37 am On the other hand, what I argued is so true.
It is a fact theists believed in a God that is idealized and reified - they put such ideas as a basis for a religion and SOME kill those who criticize their illusory God. Just imagine that, millions of innocent people are killed by theists who believed in something illusory-as-real.
If you are a theist, you are indirectly complicit to such terrible evils and violence.

God has not be proven to been real within an empirical-rational reality, so it has to be idealized and reified. How else?
So it is you who is speculating!
What you claim is your reality. robots don't have souls hence they can't relate to the soul. I think this true of zombies also but I hear things like God's eternal mercy so who knows.
What you hear is merely hearsay. It cannot be real until it is justified to be true.
So far no one has been able to prove God exists as real within an empirical-rational reality.
I say again, Why you are making such a claim [God exists] is due to your psychology to deal with an inherent existential crisis.
I'm asking you to define something that exists within the realm of empirical-rational reality and manifest it so that it might be known to me.
Science is the best source to justify a piece of 'granite' exists.
Note What is granite - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Granite
If a thing is proven as a piece of granite, anyone anytime can test and verify with the same result that is it a piece of granite within the Scientific Framework, System and Method. It is opened to you to test and verify yourself.

Whereas the thing called God is not available to be tested and verified by anyone anytime to arrive at the same result within an empirical-rational reality.
My point is a pearl is developed through time at expense to the suffering of the oyster.
Suffering of the oyster?? This is ridiculous and off topic.
In a very real sense we create our perceived reality and our perceived realities can have impact on others. An example is Nazism, a unified belief that ultimately led to a nightmare for all.
Yes, it is the same for theists who idealized the idea of God into an ideology where SOME believers commit terrible evil and violent acts.
There is no pre-existing God out there waiting for believers to believe in it and no such a God commanding believers to do all sorts of evil [& good as well] acts.
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.
Spectrum
Posts: 5161
Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various

Re: Proof of God

Post by Spectrum »

jerlands wrote: March 9th, 2018, 10:08 pm
Spectrum wrote: March 9th, 2018, 1:37 am God has not be proven to been real within an empirical-rational reality, so it has to be idealized and reified. How else?
So it is you who is speculating!
Spectrum wrote: March 7th, 2018, 10:33 pm P1. Absolute perfection is an impossibility within an empirical-rational reality.
P2. God, imperatively must be absolutely perfect
C. Therefore God is an impossibility.
Here's the gist of the issue presented in your expression...

The definition of absolute is "not diminished in any way." Can you see the problem putting the notion of God within that framework so that it might be comprehensible.

The definition of perfection is "the condition, state, or quality of being free or as free as possible from all flaws or defects." The other problem in your premise is man has to perceive perfection to perceive God.

So, your two qualifiers "absolute perfection" as a definition of God are both somewhat incomprensible to common man.

Note absolute = totally unconditional.

That is my point, the idea idealized by theists i.e. an 'absolutely perfect' God is an impossibility within an empirical-rational reality.
Such an idea is incomprensible not only to the common people but to all humans.

To claim something exists because it is incomprensible is an insult to one's basic intelligence.
Can a murderer justify he is innocent because some incomprehensible being command him to kill another human?

There is no pre-existing God out there waiting for potential theists to believe in it.
The only valid reason why theists idealized the idea of God [illusory and impossible] is because the idea is effective in dissolving the existential angst arising from an existential crisis. This fundamental reason is psychological.
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.
Spectrum
Posts: 5161
Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various

Re: Proof of God

Post by Spectrum »

Dark Matter wrote: March 9th, 2018, 6:58 pm
Spectrum wrote: ↑Fri Mar 09, 2018 12:37 am
My basis is Philosophical Anti-Realism where reality is interdependent with humans. Therefore there is no such thing as anything or a God that is absolutely independent of humans.
You sure have a strange and divisive way of saying you’re a pantheist.
Yes there are Philosophical Anti-Realists who are theists [e.g. George Berkeley], deists, pantheist and panentheist but not all are.
I am a Philosophical Anti-Realist [at one fundamental level - not the most fundamental level] who is non-theistic.
Being Philosophical Anti-Realist at one level do not imply I am totally out of it. In one cruder perspective I agree and has to be pragmatic with the concept of an external reality.

The problem here is being dogmatic with 'Philosophical Realism' as the ONLY perspective of reality.
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.
User avatar
jerlands
Posts: 431
Joined: December 12th, 2017, 10:56 pm

Re: Proof of God

Post by jerlands »

Spectrum wrote: March 9th, 2018, 10:49 pm
jerlands wrote: March 9th, 2018, 7:01 pm
This is a perspective I hear echoed by others on this board. That the situation creates the reality or what you claim creates the fantasy which is the compensating component for what they're experiencing. I see that as blatantly wrong.
You are just making a straw man and claiming your own view is blatantly wrong.
I don't think you understand the point and I cannot understand your point re 'That the situation.."
Can you counter why the points I raised do not create a psychological turmoil within your psyche?
It's disturbing to me to see any form of abuse but people do it all the time and if you're asking if that creates psychological turmoil within my psyche I'd say you're incompetent to understand. People abuse animals, they abuse people they abuse the earth and all of it disturbs me. Just the simple failure in consideration disturbs but then again, this goes toward my own behavior and beliefs also. I have to make that measure. You determine God arises as a creation of man but I see it as Man becoming aware, conscious of God.
Spectrum wrote: March 9th, 2018, 10:49 pm
Yes, Life after death is very much about the future.
My point is why are theists so concern with the after-life when there is no such proofs of its reality. Why?
Isn't there proof or do we just ignore it? I think of offspring as the notion of life after death manifest. If you think of life of the soul after death you're really asking is the identity of the person is aligned with truth or whatever it is we might consider to be that which exists.
Spectrum wrote: March 9th, 2018, 10:49 pm
There's enough proof in the world in and through men that speak to me.
Where is your proofs that a God exists within the empirical-rational reality.
Other than reason and empirical-rational reality, what other mode of reality can you prove a God exists?

Note the evident existence of the things in the Universe prove the realness of those things in the Universe but it does not follow a God exists and created those things.
Why you are making such a claim is due to your psychology.
If God exists doesn't rely on my mind. That's akin to the question does a falling tree make a sound if no one's around to hear. Man only recognizes things, we don't create anything, not even in our imagination. We have to touch upon something for our mind to perceive it but it's perception that puts it into perspective.
Spectrum wrote: March 9th, 2018, 10:49 pm
Spectrum wrote: March 9th, 2018, 1:37 am On the other hand, what I argued is so true.
It is a fact theists believed in a God that is idealized and reified - they put such ideas as a basis for a religion and SOME kill those who criticize their illusory God. Just imagine that, millions of innocent people are killed by theists who believed in something illusory-as-real.
If you are a theist, you are indirectly complicit to such terrible evils and violence.

God has not be proven to been real within an empirical-rational reality, so it has to be idealized and reified. How else?
So it is you who is speculating!
What you claim is your reality. robots don't have souls hence they can't relate to the soul. I think this true of zombies also but I hear things like God's eternal mercy so who knows.
What you hear is merely hearsay. It cannot be real until it is justified to be true.
So far no one has been able to prove God exists as real within an empirical-rational reality.
I say again, Why you are making such a claim [God exists] is due to your psychology to deal with an inherent existential crisis.
I'm not ignorant. I know what exists from man and what exists from God. I can see this because man is not the creator. Man only assembles bits and pieces of that which pre-exists. Was man present at the moment of creation? I think that's a possibility. But we live in a world we did not build though we seem trapped by our perception of it.
Spectrum wrote: March 9th, 2018, 10:49 pm
I'm asking you to define something that exists within the realm of empirical-rational reality and manifest it so that it might be known to me.
Science is the best source to justify a piece of 'granite' exists.
Note What is granite - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Granite
If a thing is proven as a piece of granite, anyone anytime can test and verify with the same result that is it a piece of granite within the Scientific Framework, System and Method. It is opened to you to test and verify yourself.

Whereas the thing called God is not available to be tested and verified by anyone anytime to arrive at the same result within an empirical-rational reality.
My point was the only way to truly know granite it so experience it.
Spectrum wrote: March 9th, 2018, 10:49 pm
My point is a pearl is developed through time at expense to the suffering of the oyster.
Suffering of the oyster?? This is ridiculous and off topic.
This will explain to you how pearls are formed.
Spectrum wrote: March 9th, 2018, 10:49 pm
In a very real sense we create our perceived reality and our perceived realities can have impact on others. An example is Nazism, a unified belief that ultimately led to a nightmare for all.
Yes, it is the same for theists who idealized the idea of God into an ideology where SOME believers commit terrible evil and violent acts.
There is no pre-existing God out there waiting for believers to believe in it and no such a God commanding believers to do all sorts of evil [& good as well] acts.
Well, people do things for all sorts of reasons but that isn't the point. The point in religion is largely based on salvation so understanding that concept might lead to deeper understanding, deeper appreciation... I don't know.
"It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so." - Mark Twain
User avatar
jerlands
Posts: 431
Joined: December 12th, 2017, 10:56 pm

Re: Proof of God

Post by jerlands »

Spectrum wrote: March 9th, 2018, 11:23 pm
Dark Matter wrote: March 9th, 2018, 6:58 pm
You sure have a strange and divisive way of saying you’re a pantheist.
Yes there are Philosophical Anti-Realists who are theists [e.g. George Berkeley], deists, pantheist and panentheist but not all are.
I am a Philosophical Anti-Realist [at one fundamental level - not the most fundamental level] who is non-theistic.
Being Philosophical Anti-Realist at one level do not imply I am totally out of it. In one cruder perspective I agree and has to be pragmatic with the concept of an external reality.

The problem here is being dogmatic with 'Philosophical Realism' as the ONLY perspective of reality.
Basically I think you have to find God in yourself to understand God. If all your beliefs and studies dont' take you there means nothing to me.
"It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so." - Mark Twain
User avatar
jerlands
Posts: 431
Joined: December 12th, 2017, 10:56 pm

Re: Proof of God

Post by jerlands »

Spectrum wrote: March 9th, 2018, 11:05 pm
jerlands wrote: March 9th, 2018, 10:08 pm Here's the gist of the issue presented in your expression...

The definition of absolute is "not diminished in any way." Can you see the problem putting the notion of God within that framework so that it might be comprehensible.

The definition of perfection is "the condition, state, or quality of being free or as free as possible from all flaws or defects." The other problem in your premise is man has to perceive perfection to perceive God.

So, your two qualifiers "absolute perfection" as a definition of God are both somewhat incomprensible to common man.

Note absolute = totally unconditional.

That is my point, the idea idealized by theists i.e. an 'absolutely perfect' God is an impossibility within an empirical-rational reality.
Such an idea is incomprensible not only to the common people but to all humans.

To claim something exists because it is incomprensible is an insult to one's basic intelligence.
Can a murderer justify he is innocent because some incomprehensible being command him to kill another human?

There is no pre-existing God out there waiting for potential theists to believe in it.
The only valid reason why theists idealized the idea of God [illusory and impossible] is because the idea is effective in dissolving the existential angst arising from an existential crisis. This fundamental reason is psychological.
Are all things comprehensible, I mean can we put all things into clear perspective? Well, have we yet gathered what "all things" are? We see energy and matter as similar things, at their most basic levels they both have similar signatures, being wave like. Waves basically arise from expansion and contraction so in everything we have this signature of expansion and contraction. The question is not only why but how does this signature exist in all things? This question was answered long ago and expressed later in time in the Kabbalistic story of creation through the act of Tzimtzum. So in a way, what man conceived in his mind long ago is being proven in today's scientific methods.
"It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so." - Mark Twain
Spectrum
Posts: 5161
Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various

Re: Proof of God

Post by Spectrum »

jerlands wrote: March 9th, 2018, 11:50 pm
Spectrum wrote: March 9th, 2018, 10:49 pm You are just making a straw man and claiming your own view is blatantly wrong.
I don't think you understand the point and I cannot understand your point re 'That the situation.."
Can you counter why the points I raised do not create a psychological turmoil within your psyche?
It's disturbing to me to see any form of abuse but people do it all the time and if you're asking if that creates psychological turmoil within my psyche I'd say you're incompetent to understand. People abuse animals, they abuse people they abuse the earth and all of it disturbs me. Just the simple failure in consideration disturbs but then again, this goes toward my own behavior and beliefs also. I have to make that measure. You determine God arises as a creation of man but I see it as Man becoming aware, conscious of God.
You missed my point and going way off it.
My point is ALL humans are aware of their mortality and there is nothing they can do about it. For the majority this is a big existential issue [the psychological turmoil in the subconscious] and they resort to an idealized God to deal with this existential crisis. This is the psychological reason why theists invent and believe in a God.
Spectrum wrote: March 9th, 2018, 10:49 pm My point is why are theists so concern with the after-life when there is no such proofs of its reality. Why?
Isn't there proof or do we just ignore it? I think of offspring as the notion of life after death manifest. If you think of life of the soul after death you're really asking is the identity of the person is aligned with truth or whatever it is we might consider to be that which exists.
Where is the solid proof there is life after physical death?
There are claims from those who experience Near Death Experience [NDEs] which is at best very flimsy.
Spectrum wrote: March 9th, 2018, 10:49 pm Where is your proofs that a God exists within the empirical-rational reality.
Other than reason and empirical-rational reality, what other mode of reality can you prove a God exists?

Note the evident existence of the things in the Universe prove the realness of those things in the Universe but it does not follow a God exists and created those things.
Why you are making such a claim is due to your psychology.
If God exists doesn't rely on my mind. That's akin to the question does a falling tree make a sound if no one's around to hear. Man only recognizes things, we don't create anything, not even in our imagination. We have to touch upon something for our mind to perceive it but it's perception that puts it into perspective.
If God exists doesn't rely on my mind.
I think you meant - If God exists does rely on my mind.

Btw, humans create things, tables, chairs, cars and all sorts of human-made thing.
As I had stated, humans are the co-creator of reality.

It is claimed, the moon existed before there were humans. So humans cannot be interdependent with the reality of the moon. This is Philosophical Realism.
I mentioned this but perhaps such is beyond your philosophical comprehension??
But I have stated that the Philosophical anti-realism views to counter the above that the existence of the 'moon' before and after humans existed is interdependent with humans.
This is a serious counter claim which I agree, but you have to upgrade your philosophical perspective to understand [not necessary agree] such counter views.

From the above counter views of the philosophical anti-realists the idea of god is invented by humans and not that God exists as real within an empirical-rational reality.
Spectrum wrote: March 9th, 2018, 10:49 pm What you hear is merely hearsay. It cannot be real until it is justified to be true.
So far no one has been able to prove God exists as real within an empirical-rational reality.
I say again, Why you are making such a claim [God exists] is due to your psychology to deal with an inherent existential crisis.
I'm not ignorant. I know what exists from man and what exists from God. I can see this because man is not the creator. Man only assembles bits and pieces of that which pre-exists. Was man present at the moment of creation? I think that's a possibility. But we live in a world we did not build though we seem trapped by our perception of it.
What you claim is common sense, but common sense is not verifiable knowledge.

Note I provided a counter argument;
we human perceive reality that we co-created.

Why do not insist on God positively when you have not proved it exists as real?

Spectrum wrote: March 9th, 2018, 10:49 pm Science is the best source to justify a piece of 'granite' exists.
Note What is granite - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Granite
If a thing is proven as a piece of granite, anyone anytime can test and verify with the same result that is it a piece of granite within the Scientific Framework, System and Method. It is opened to you to test and verify yourself.

Whereas the thing called God is not available to be tested and verified by anyone anytime to arrive at the same result within an empirical-rational reality.
My point was the only way to truly know granite it so experience it.
Experience is not enough.
A madman can have certain experience and claim it to be true.
Sometime we experience seeing an illusion, e.g. a mirage, but that mirage is not the true and real thing.

What is real must be observable, experienced and justified to be true.
It must be justified within a credible process, framework and system.

God is claimed to be experienced by theists, but mad people and others also claimed to experience god. In both cases it cannot be justified by credible processes.
Spectrum wrote: March 9th, 2018, 10:49 pm
Suffering of the oyster?? This is ridiculous and off topic.
This will explain to you how pearls are formed.
[
To say the oyster suffers for it is ridiculous.
Spectrum wrote: March 9th, 2018, 10:49 pm Yes, it is the same for theists who idealized the idea of God into an ideology where SOME believers commit terrible evil and violent acts.
There is no pre-existing God out there waiting for believers to believe in it and no such a God commanding believers to do all sorts of evil [& good as well] acts.
Well, people do things for all sorts of reasons but that isn't the point. The point in religion is largely based on salvation so understanding that concept might lead to deeper understanding, deeper appreciation... I don't know.
'I don't know' would be acceptable.
What is fact is the idea of God is from within the mind of theist[s].
But theists cannot insist God is real within an empirical-rational reality.

The significance of the above is to prevent SOME believers [potentially > 300 million :shock: ] from insisting their God is real within an empirical-rational reality and their God revealed commands to a messenger that drive believers to kill non-believers [note the religion of peace].
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.
Spectrum
Posts: 5161
Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various

Re: Proof of God

Post by Spectrum »

jerlands wrote: March 10th, 2018, 12:07 am
Spectrum wrote: March 9th, 2018, 11:23 pm Yes there are Philosophical Anti-Realists who are theists [e.g. George Berkeley], deists, pantheist and panentheist but not all are.
I am a Philosophical Anti-Realist [at one fundamental level - not the most fundamental level] who is non-theistic.
Being Philosophical Anti-Realist at one level do not imply I am totally out of it. In one cruder perspective I agree and has to be pragmatic with the concept of an external reality.

The problem here is being dogmatic with 'Philosophical Realism' as the ONLY perspective of reality.
Basically I think you have to find God in yourself to understand God. If all your beliefs and studies dont' take you there means nothing to me.
What kind of claim is that.
I can say that in the contrary.
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.
Spectrum
Posts: 5161
Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various

Re: Proof of God

Post by Spectrum »

jerlands wrote: March 10th, 2018, 12:33 am
Spectrum wrote: March 9th, 2018, 11:05 pm To claim something exists because it is incomprensible is an insult to one's basic intelligence.
Can a murderer justify he is innocent because some incomprehensible being command him to kill another human?

There is no pre-existing God out there waiting for potential theists to believe in it.
The only valid reason why theists idealized the idea of God [illusory and impossible] is because the idea is effective in dissolving the existential angst arising from an existential crisis. This fundamental reason is psychological.
Are all things comprehensible, I mean can we put all things into clear perspective? Well, have we yet gathered what "all things" are? We see energy and matter as similar things, at their most basic levels they both have similar signatures, being wave like. Waves basically arise from expansion and contraction so in everything we have this signature of expansion and contraction. The question is not only why but how does this signature exist in all things? This question was answered long ago and expressed later in time in the Kabbalistic story of creation through the act of Tzimtzum. So in a way, what man conceived in his mind long ago is being proven in today's scientific methods.
My point is you cannot claim something exists as real or possibly real because it is incomprehensible.

What is incomprehensible may exists as an idea only but one cannot claim it is real or possibly real without the necessary justifications.
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.
User avatar
jerlands
Posts: 431
Joined: December 12th, 2017, 10:56 pm

Re: Proof of God

Post by jerlands »

Spectrum wrote: March 10th, 2018, 12:51 am
jerlands wrote: March 9th, 2018, 11:50 pm
It's disturbing to me to see any form of abuse but people do it all the time and if you're asking if that creates psychological turmoil within my psyche I'd say you're incompetent to understand. People abuse animals, they abuse people they abuse the earth and all of it disturbs me. Just the simple failure in consideration disturbs but then again, this goes toward my own behavior and beliefs also. I have to make that measure. You determine God arises as a creation of man but I see it as Man becoming aware, conscious of God.
You missed my point and going way off it.
My point is ALL humans are aware of their mortality and there is nothing they can do about it. For the majority this is a big existential issue [the psychological turmoil in the subconscious] and they resort to an idealized God to deal with this existential crisis. This is the psychological reason why theists invent and believe in a God.
Spectrum wrote: March 10th, 2018, 12:51 am
jerlands wrote: March 9th, 2018, 11:50 pm Isn't there proof or do we just ignore it? I think of offspring as the notion of life after death manifest. If you think of life of the soul after death you're really asking is the identity of the person is aligned with truth or whatever it is we might consider to be that which exists.
Where is the solid proof there is life after physical death?
There are claims from those who experience Near Death Experience [NDEs] which is at best very flimsy.
There is no one structured sentence that fully expresses our existence but our reality is composed of relationships between ourselves and other things. We see things outside and try and touch upon them on the inside. The notion of life after death isn't new but ancient. What they perceived is expressed in their teachings and art, what I perceive alongside of that might be "the first law of thermodynamics" or as I expressed as the seed of a plant. What solid proof is there? What solid proof are you looking for? What solid proof could exist?
Spectrum wrote: March 10th, 2018, 12:51 am
jerlands wrote: March 9th, 2018, 11:50 pm If God exists doesn't rely on my mind. That's akin to the question does a falling tree make a sound if no one's around to hear. Man only recognizes things, we don't create anything, not even in our imagination. We have to touch upon something for our mind to perceive it but it's perception that puts it into perspective.
If God exists doesn't rely on my mind.
I think you meant - If God exists does rely on my mind.
No, I meant God doesn't rely on me to exist. I think man could completely and utterly fail and God would still exist.
Spectrum wrote: March 10th, 2018, 12:51 am Btw, humans create things, tables, chairs, cars and all sorts of human-made thing.
As I had stated, humans are the co-creator of reality.
Humans reflect upon things that pre-exist. Man gathers notions of things. That's how life evolved, gathering notions and forming them into substance. Humans make cars, tables and chairs, true but all these things arise through time as evolved notions from something that pre-existed. Where do I find the notion of a table, a chair or a car somewhere in the metaphysical realm. Well, rest is one notion and motion and transport another.
Spectrum wrote: March 10th, 2018, 12:51 am It is claimed, the moon existed before there were humans. So humans cannot be interdependent with the reality of the moon. This is Philosophical Realism.
I mentioned this but perhaps such is beyond your philosophical comprehension??

But I have stated that the Philosophical anti-realism views to counter the above that the existence of the 'moon' before and after humans existed is interdependent with humans.
This is a serious counter claim which I agree, but you have to upgrade your philosophical perspective to understand [not necessary agree] such counter views.

From the above counter views of the philosophical anti-realists the idea of god is invented by humans and not that God exists as real within an empirical-rational reality.
There are two stories of creation in the Bible. One story places man before everything else and the other after everything else. Creation was said first to occur in the mind and then manifest so completeness would then encompass everything. I don't know how that fits in with your perspective but it's another that does exist.
Spectrum wrote: March 10th, 2018, 12:51 am
jerlands wrote: March 9th, 2018, 11:50 pm I'm not ignorant. I know what exists from man and what exists from God. I can see this because man is not the creator. Man only assembles bits and pieces of that which pre-exists. Was man present at the moment of creation? I think that's a possibility. But we live in a world we did not build though we seem trapped by our perception of it.
What you claim is common sense, but common sense is not verifiable knowledge.

Note I provided a counter argument;
we human perceive reality that we co-created.

Why do not insist on God positively when you have not proved it exists as real?
I frankly don't know. I don't know really anything but express my views as far as I can. I perceive God as the creative causal force that right now seems not be be as present in our lives as possibly was in the past (and I'm referring to what Biblical thought conceives as the presence of God.)
Spectrum wrote: March 10th, 2018, 12:51 am
jerlands wrote: March 9th, 2018, 11:50 pm My point was the only way to truly know granite it so experience it.
Experience is not enough.
A madman can have certain experience and claim it to be true.
Sometime we experience seeing an illusion, e.g. a mirage, but that mirage is not the true and real thing.

What is real must be observable, experienced and justified to be true.
It must be justified within a credible process, framework and system.

God is claimed to be experienced by theists, but mad people and others also claimed to experience god. In both cases it cannot be justified by credible processes.
I've expressed that I believe God is only found within the individual. It's man rising to what he was meant to be. How this is proven or known is introspection and expressed to others through the works of the risen man. I think that is a very basic explanation but should be comprehensible.
Spectrum wrote: March 10th, 2018, 12:51 am
jerlands wrote: March 9th, 2018, 11:50 pm This will explain to you how pearls are formed.
[
To say the oyster suffers for it is ridiculous.
A pearl forms because of an irritant to the oyster. It tries to protect itself, similar to muscle ossificans that form after injury.
Spectrum wrote: March 10th, 2018, 12:51 am
Well, people do things for all sorts of reasons but that isn't the point. The point in religion is largely based on salvation so understanding that concept might lead to deeper understanding, deeper appreciation... I don't know.
'I don't know' would be acceptable.
What is fact is the idea of God is from within the mind of theist[s].
But theists cannot insist God is real within an empirical-rational reality.

The significance of the above is to prevent SOME believers [potentially > 300 million :shock: ] from insisting their God is real within an empirical-rational reality and their God revealed commands to a messenger that drive believers to kill non-believers [note the religion of peace].
Well, I think the reality is man hears what he want to hear and disregards the rest.
.
"It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so." - Mark Twain
User avatar
jerlands
Posts: 431
Joined: December 12th, 2017, 10:56 pm

Re: Proof of God

Post by jerlands »

Spectrum wrote: March 10th, 2018, 1:02 am
jerlands wrote: March 10th, 2018, 12:33 am
Are all things comprehensible, I mean can we put all things into clear perspective? Well, have we yet gathered what "all things" are? We see energy and matter as similar things, at their most basic levels they both have similar signatures, being wave like. Waves basically arise from expansion and contraction so in everything we have this signature of expansion and contraction. The question is not only why but how does this signature exist in all things? This question was answered long ago and expressed later in time in the Kabbalistic story of creation through the act of Tzimtzum. So in a way, what man conceived in his mind long ago is being proven in today's scientific methods.
My point is you cannot claim something exists as real or possibly real because it is incomprehensible.

What is incomprehensible may exists as an idea only but one cannot claim it is real or possibly real without the necessary justifications.
Do you see anything as incomprehensible? Comprehension relies on perception, how we view things. What is the earth in relation to man? What is the moon in relation to man? What is the sun in relation to man? We've removed ourselves from these concepts of relation but they are real and it is uniting elements of reality that help form a broader picture.
.
"It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so." - Mark Twain
Spectrum
Posts: 5161
Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various

Re: Proof of God

Post by Spectrum »

jerlands wrote: March 10th, 2018, 2:51 am
Spectrum wrote: March 10th, 2018, 1:02 am My point is you cannot claim something exists as real or possibly real because it is incomprehensible.

What is incomprehensible may exists as an idea only but one cannot claim it is real or possibly real without the necessary justifications.
Do you see anything as incomprehensible? Comprehension relies on perception, how we view things. What is the earth in relation to man? What is the moon in relation to man? What is the sun in relation to man? We've removed ourselves from these concepts of relation but they are real and it is uniting elements of reality that help form a broader picture.
.
Comprehend = grasp mentally; understand.

Thus comprehension do not have to rely solely on perception.
Surely you can understand the concept of a perfect circle which is an ideal and do not exists within an empirical-rational reality. There are so many other things one can comprehend that are not perceivable but comprehensible by reason alone.

Note my point again;
My point is you cannot claim something exists as real or possibly real because it is incomprehensible.

You claim something like "God is incomprehensible, therefore exists."
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.
User avatar
jerlands
Posts: 431
Joined: December 12th, 2017, 10:56 pm

Re: Proof of God

Post by jerlands »

Spectrum wrote: March 10th, 2018, 10:39 pm
jerlands wrote: March 10th, 2018, 2:51 am
Do you see anything as incomprehensible? Comprehension relies on perception, how we view things. What is the earth in relation to man? What is the moon in relation to man? What is the sun in relation to man? We've removed ourselves from these concepts of relation but they are real and it is uniting elements of reality that help form a broader picture.
.
Comprehend = grasp mentally; understand.

Thus comprehension do not have to rely solely on perception.
Surely you can understand the concept of a perfect circle which is an ideal and do not exists within an empirical-rational reality. There are so many other things one can comprehend that are not perceivable but comprehensible by reason alone.

Note my point again;
My point is you cannot claim something exists as real or possibly real because it is incomprehensible.

You claim something like "God is incomprehensible, therefore exists."
perceive (v.)
c. 1300, via Anglo-French parceif, Old North French *perceivre (Old French perçoivre) "perceive, notice, see; recognize, understand," from Latin percipere "obtain, gather, seize entirely, take possession of," also, figuratively, "to grasp with the mind, learn, comprehend," literally "to take entirely," from per "thoroughly" (see per) + capere "to grasp, take," from PIE root *kap- "to grasp."
That is not my claim. Knowledge exists as probability and we prove things through the fact the premise is repeatable. To comprehend the entirety is a lot to bear therefore I perceive it's difficulty. I do not accept the notion of God solely through negation but also through affirmation. I am able to see that man did not create the earth, the animals, the trees or anything else for that matter. So how is do I explain the existence of that which seemingly is apart from self. I am a dependant, I depend on my environment to provide those things necessary for my survival. On of the things provided me was a teaching that I found relation in. I was able to touch upon it and see that truth within myself. Do I know absolutely that God exist? No but I clearly see evidence to support that conclusion.
"It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so." - Mark Twain
Spectrum
Posts: 5161
Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various

Re: Proof of God

Post by Spectrum »

jerlands wrote: March 10th, 2018, 11:03 pm
Spectrum wrote: March 10th, 2018, 10:39 pm Comprehend = grasp mentally; understand.

Thus comprehension do not have to rely solely on perception.
Surely you can understand the concept of a perfect circle which is an ideal and do not exists within an empirical-rational reality. There are so many other things one can comprehend that are not perceivable but comprehensible by reason alone.

Note my point again;
My point is you cannot claim something exists as real or possibly real because it is incomprehensible.

You claim something like "God is incomprehensible, therefore exists."
perceive (v.)
c. 1300, via Anglo-French parceif, Old North French *perceivre (Old French perçoivre) "perceive, notice, see; recognize, understand," from Latin percipere "obtain, gather, seize entirely, take possession of," also, figuratively, "to grasp with the mind, learn, comprehend," literally "to take entirely," from per "thoroughly" (see per) + capere "to grasp, take," from PIE root *kap- "to grasp."
That is not my claim. Knowledge exists as probability and we prove things through the fact the premise is repeatable. To comprehend the entirety is a lot to bear therefore I perceive it's difficulty. I do not accept the notion of God solely through negation but also through affirmation.
I am able to see that man did not create the earth, the animals, the trees or anything else for that matter.
So how is do I explain the existence of that which seemingly is apart from self.
Note humans have evolved with dualism [subject versus object] as the default reality to facilitate basis survival. Without this embedded dualism it is like humans could have gone extinct by now.

But as humans evolved further its understanding of the nature, complexity, threats and opportunities of reality expanded. Thus the default subject - object [Self - God] view is relevant but not precise to deal with the expanded vision of reality.

Note the changes and progress in Physics from Newtonian [subject - object] to Relativity [subject influence reality] to Quantum Mechanics [reality dependent on when observed - Collapse Wave Function].

As in Philosophy there are also progress in philosophical thinking from
  • 1. Philosophical Realism - the concept of an external world that is absolutely independent of the Self to
    2. Philosophical anti-realism - an external world that is interdependent with the Self.
In view 1, there is the external God that created the external World which is apart from the Self.

In view 2, for most, there is no external God, the external World is co-created by the Self in which it is a part of.

For philosophy sake, you cannot insist on view 1 without understanding and countering view 2.
I am a dependant, I depend on my environment to provide those things necessary for my survival. On of the things provided me was a teaching that I found relation in. I was able to touch upon it and see that truth within myself.
Do I know absolutely that God exist? No but I clearly see evidence to support that conclusion.
As I had argued, we can speculate based on evidence [empirical] but what is speculated must be at least empirically possible.
For example I can speculate the external World is created/maintained by human-liked [thus empirical] aliens from billions of light years away within a computer program.

As I had argued the God that you speculated ultimately must be an absolute perfect God thus non-empirical thus not empirical possible i.e. an impossibility within an empirical-rational reality.

Why theists end up with a indefensible and unprovable God is due to psychological impulses that drive theists to conjure an idea of God to deal with the inherent unavoidable existential crisis.
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.
Post Reply

Return to “Philosophy of Religion, Theism and Mythology”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021