Concerning God: What do you mean, when you say, "I know for certain that he does/does not exist."?

[tkdrocks]

(I am sure that this question has been asked before on this forum, but the members come and go. So, I think it would be fun to serve it up again.)

To say that you know something "for certain" or with absolute knowledge, is pretty strong language. So when you say that you know this for certain, what does that mean exactly?

• Does it mean that you are fully convinced?
• Do you know because of some specific evidence? (If so, please share)
• Is it just strong faith?
• Something else?

I will share my thoughts later, but I thought that I would just get the ball rolling first.

 

[Sunstone]

I suspect that most of us, when we think we know for certain the answer to any metaphysical question such as the existence or non-existence of deity, are relying on our feelings, rather than on our reason and observations.

It seems to be an accepted thing these days to judge whether something is true or not by how it makes us feel. If it feels right or true, then it must be true. If it feels wrong or false, then it must be false. Reason and observation may caution us otherwise, but feelings win out.

At least that's how I see it.

 

[tkdrocks]

I suspect that most of us, when we think we know for certain the answer to any metaphysical question such as the existence or non-existence of deity, are relying on our feelings, rather than on our reason and observations.

It seems to be an accepted thing these days to judge whether something is true or not by how it makes us feel. If it feels right or true, then it must be true. If it feels wrong or false, then it must be false. Reason and observation may caution us otherwise, but feelings win out.

At least that's how I see it.

Sunstone, I don't think that I have ever seen you write that you were certain one way or another about God. Are you giving what you think it is for others? Would that be believing instead of 'knowing'?

 

[Akivah]

I suspect that most of us, when we think we know for certain the answer to any metaphysical question such as the existence or non-existence of deity, are relying on our feelings, rather than on our reason and observations.

It seems to be an accepted thing these days to judge whether something is true or not by how it makes us feel. If it feels right or true, then it must be true. If it feels wrong or false, then it must be false. Reason and observation may caution us otherwise, but feelings win out.

At least that's how I see it.

I agree with you. Most people determine how they feel about a topic and then look for evidence to support their view. Consider a topic like global warming, most people make up their mind what they believe and then find the facts and experts to support them.

It's no less than that with religion. At one time, I was sure that G-d didn't exist and I had the facts to support that belief. Now I am sure that G-d exists and I have the facts to support it. However, none of my "facts" can be used to persuade anyone else, people will believe what they want to believe.

 

[`mud]

The answer is: where is the evidence of absence or presence.
And what effect is seen from the evidence.
Miracles or calamities.
I guess it's anyone's guess.
I'll just keep remembering memories.
~
'mud

 

[viole]

(I am sure that this question has been asked before on this forum, but the members come and go. So, I think it would be fun to serve it up again.)

To say that you know something "for certain" or with absolute knowledge, is pretty strong language. So when you say that you know this for certain, what does that mean exactly?

• Does it mean that you are fully convinced?
• Do you know because of some specific evidence? (If so, please share)
• Is it just strong faith?
• Something else?

I will share my thoughts later, but I thought that I would just get the ball rolling first.

I know God does not exist.

But i m not sure that He does not.

Ciao

- viole

 

[Sunstone]

Sunstone, I don't think that I have ever seen you write that you were certain one way or another about God.

I am certain that I am uncertain about the answer to any metaphysical question, including the question of deity.

Are you giving what you think it is for others? Would that be believing instead of 'knowing'?

To me, any answer given to a metaphysical question apart from "we don't know for certain", is belief rather than knowledge.

 

[Laika]

I know of no god. There is no specific evidence for which I can make this claim, but if you could prove that consciousness is a property of matter and cannot exist independently of it (i.e. Materialism), that is as close as you could get. This would eliminate the possibility of consciousness existing without a physical form, and therefore the supernatural, the soul and god.

Ultimately, this still is a philosophical position, even if held with strong conviction, substantial evidence, backed up as a scientific consensus. From what I've read, even militant atheists cannot know for certain as knowledge is not fixed nor absolute, so they are atheists in practice. The truth has to be lived to be known. But we cannot know the future and what it may tell us as that remains unknown and yet to be fulfilled.

 

[outhouse]

To say that you know something "for certain" or with absolute knowledge, is pretty strong language

It is, and if you use it, you had better know what your talking about and have the education to back it up.

Now the only statement that can be made with certainty like that, is that there is no such thing as any deity existing outside mythology.

So when you say that you know this for certain, what does that mean exactly?

Just what you stated. I know for certain.

Man has been creating deities for thousands of years. Not up for debate. They factually create deities. From many natural events, and cultural needs.


Take the Abrahamic god concept. With education, one sees exactly how he was defined by different primitive men, and how ONLY men changed that definition at will when cultural needs changed.

What is funny is all of the deities created, mirror the cultural needs of the people.

So we have Israelites about to be ran over by an advanced civilization, and we see them place importance on Yahweh the warrior deity. And in times of peace, they go back to Baal and Asherah and El.

Its all in the historical knowledge, and study of people.

 

[Iti oj]

I think it depends on what you mean by God. Agnostic about a god atheist about your God. Even still claims made matter

 

[outhouse]

The truth has to be lived to be known

No.

Facts can be developed , in history.

Ultimately, this still is a philosophical position

Nope.

But one can always apply it philosophically.

It is a historical position generally speaking.

, even militant atheists cannot know for certain

It has nothing to do with ones degree of disbelief. A strong atheist with no knowledge is useless in this context.

 

[outhouse]

I think it depends on what you mean by God.

That is a very valid point.

Its all about people, its about cultural anthropology. People are the ones doing all the recording and defining deities different.

If you don't know the people, you don't understand the god concepts.

People all define these concepts differently. Knowing why is the key.

 

[tkdrocks]

It's no less than that with religion. At one time, I was sure that G-d didn't exist and I had the facts to support that belief. Now I am sure that G-d exists and I have the facts to support it. However, none of my "facts" can be used to persuade anyone else, people will believe what they want to believe.

Generally, when I see the word, "fact", I am thinking, by definition of something that is verifiable or falsifiable. Do any of your facts meet this criteria? (Friendly question, just curious).

 

[tkdrocks]

I think it depends on what you mean by God. Agnostic about a god atheist about your God. Even still claims made matter

I agree, a very valid point and these type of discussions, necessarily have to go down this path. When a person says they are certain about their idea of God, I like to get them to define "God" for me. Once they describe that 4 sided triangle, then I can be very specific about what I don't believe.

 

[outhouse]

. Now I am sure that G-d exists and I have the facts to support it.

You factually do not have facts of any kind

 

[Laika]

No.

Facts can be developed , in history.

Nope.

But one can always apply it philosophically.

It is a historical position generally speaking.

It has nothing to do with ones degree of disbelief. A strong atheist with no knowledge is useless in this context.

I adhere to a broadly Marxian atheism which holds the view that Science contains a significant amount of philosophy. to the best of my knowledge, in the 20th century scientists have often forgotten the philosophical roots of science whilst seeking to standardize the scientific method and therefore claims to truth have become more absolute than they were in the 19th century.(edit: wrongly in my view).
Science is ideology and our ideas are an imperfect reflection of the objective world. Knowledge reflects the objective world but contains an element of subjectivity based on the limits of our cognition and our technology to discover the truth. hence truth cannot be absolute and can only be discovered in practice. There is progress and growth of knowledge, but it is not absolute or certain. To the best of my knowledge Soviet claims of "Scientific Atheism" contain this limitation, although they would rarely admit it as it would hurt the need for certainty and ideological orthodoxy.

 

[Etritonakin]

(I am sure that this question has been asked before on this forum, but the members come and go. So, I think it would be fun to serve it up again.)

To say that you know something "for certain" or with absolute knowledge, is pretty strong language. So when you say that you know this for certain, what does that mean exactly?

• Does it mean that you are fully convinced?
• Do you know because of some specific evidence? (If so, please share)
• Is it just strong faith?
• Something else?

I will share my thoughts later, but I thought that I would just get the ball rolling first.

I am both fully convinced by reason, and know because of specific evidence.

At one point I can say that I simply believed -which is what many call faith -but have found that faith is much different.

I'll explain more later, but consider the experience of Saul. He believed in God to some degree -but acted against God on behalf of those who were to be acting for God.
He did not know God -did not understand the truth -and didn't really have true faith.
While it is true that faith is the substance of things not seen, that does not mean it is not based on things which are very real -or based on things seen or experienced previously.
Few have ever seen an electron -but can know it exists due to other things.

Joh 20:29 Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.
If one NEVER believes what they don't see, they don't get very far even in worldly matters.
Saul experienced something very real -as had Thomas experienced other things before he doubted.
Saul then had reason to take the matter very seriously -and examine his beliefs and practices.

Faith begins -and is then strengthened by both reason and experience -to the point that something can be known without seeing -even if one does not yet know everything about what they know.

Rom 1:17 For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith.

Then -one can confidently make decisions based on what is known -but not actually seen.
Those who have faith are first called by God -then come to God -beginning with the belief that he exists.

Heb 11:6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.

Even though Abraham knew not where he was going -he had experienced enough beforehand to confidently do so.

Heb 11:8 By faith Abraham, when he was called to go out into a place which he should after receive for an inheritance, obeyed; and he went out, not knowing whither he went.

Belief is the having the idea that God exists -faith is being certain enough to do the will of God regardless of situation -and knowing that regardless of the immediate outcome it is worthwhile.

Sometimes God might keep the lions from eating you -sometimes he might not -but in either case you will be resurrected and rewarded for diligently seeking him.

 

[Cephus]

No, it means you don't know what the hell knowledge is. Knowledge requires some demonstrable basis in fact to exist. You can't just make an unsupported claim like "I know leprechauns are real" and expect to be at all credible. You have to be able to back it up with more than your say-so and blind faith.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Good question. Let me see..

To say that you know something "for certain" or with absolute knowledge, is pretty strong language. So when you say that you know this for certain, what does that mean exactly?

For me, it has to do with feeling (as described above) and it has to do with common sense. By feeling, I'd have to experience it first hand and live that experience (do something, as in prayer, ritual), to be involved to know my feelings are concrete or are they fluff.

With God, being to me God is life, it is common sense. It is without "God" there is no life. Rather than God creating life, He (if you like) IS life. So my life, your life, everything living and that exists are God. (the personification of life not pantheism).

On that note you ask:

1. Does it mean that you are fully convinced?

Yes. I am fully convinced because I know that I am breathing, my heart is beating, and so forth and I and no human can create this out of thin air. I know because I can see creation just by watching a baby being born. I believe we come from the water and I can see God in the waters as we come from "Him" as He is the water that nourishes us and births us.

I know because I have experienced and feel the blessings and warnings that my deceased family has given me as I start talking with them more. The communication between us is supported by the spirit that keeps us together as a family--and to many people ,that spirit is God.

Do you know because of some specific evidence? (If so, please share)

Yes. In addition to above, when I see someone who lives in their faith, their behavior changes, their speech does, and how they see life. These are evidence that the spirit (or however one calls him or her or it) is working through that person to live.

I see evidence in the people in history who talk about their own experience with their God.

I see the evidence more strongly in how people change rather than written books.

Is it just strong faith?

It is strong faith.

Something else?

Knowing God exists is to have a relationship with life, nothing more.

 

[tkdrocks]

I am both fully convinced by reason, and know because of specific evidence.
At one point I can say that I simply believed -which is what many call faith -but have found that faith is much different.
I'll explain more later, but consider the experience of Saul. He believed in God to some degree -but acted against God on behalf of those who were to be acting for God.
He did not know God -did not understand the truth -and didn't really have true faith.
While it is true that faith is the substance of things not seen, that does not mean it is not based on things which are very real -or based on things seen or experienced previously.
Few have ever seen an electron -but can know it exists due to other things.

.

As you may be able to tell from my signature, my goal in life is to undermine 'Revealed Religion'. As evidenced by this story "The boy who went to heaven", testimonials are not great (terrible, actually) when it comes to evidence. Humans tend to exaggerate, or (gasp), even lie to promote their idea. What I do find entertaining about the story of Thomas is that it is an attempt to quash those that wanted proof by telling them that they would be 'more blessed' by believing without proof.

So, in short, I do not value accounts from ancient texts as good evidence. To be consistent, I think journalists are really bad at getting their facts straight, as well. That is why we do not take people to trial based on what is in the newspaper.

As far as I know, no one, has yet seen an electron (even with an electron microscope). However, it is very detectable and testable. So much so, I can definitely say that I "KNOW" what will happen if I put my finger into a charged light socket.

If one NEVER believes what they don't see, they don't get very far even in worldly matters.

I can think of lot's of examples where a person believes without seeing, that doesn't mean there isn't verification. Think about stepping onto an elevator. You cannot see the internal workings of this device or the cables attached to the box you step into. What you do see, if you look, is the inspection sticker as well as the fact that everyone else is getting where they need to go.

Those who have faith are first called by God -then come to God -beginning with the belief that he exists.

Heb 11:6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.

It would seem that the expectation is to believe before you seek. That is kind of getting the cart before the horse, is it not? If I have found, in my life that if I have a preconceived idea of something before I research it, I end up tainting my results.

I do notice that you are using a lot of Bible quotes as reason, may I ask how you view the Bible? Do you believe it to be inerrant? Do you take both the Old and New Testaments as literal history? I ask to help me frame my questions, so I understand your position a little better.

Cheers.