How to prove God.

[Trailblazer]

Something unproven is not a fact...

Is science unproven?

 

[Wildswanderer]

The world we live in is far too complex with so many variables that proofs are meaningless. Absolute truths are a fiction in humans brains and humans brains never really see reality

Right because reality is not just the physical plane. We're also spiritual beings. We see only fragments of what is real. The more connected we are to God, the source of all life, the more reality we are able to absorb.

 

[Wildswanderer]

Is science unproven?

Absolutely.

 

[Trailblazer]

Right because reality is not just the physical plane.

I fully agree with that. This physical world is just a reflection of the real world, which is spiritual, as everyone will discover after their physical death when they cross over, although some of us already know.

“The spiritual world is like unto the phenomenal world. They are the exact counterpart of each other. Whatever objects appear in this world of existence are the outer pictures of the world of heaven.” The Promulgation of Universal Peace, p. 10

 

[Trailblazer]

Absolutely.

Do you believe that nothing in science has been proven, or just certain things?

 

[F1fan]

Everyone has to eat in order to live but nobody has to have children. It's a choice that comes with a lot or work and certain risks. If people want the benefits of having children they have to accept the work and risks.

So if no one has any kids the human species will be extinct in about 90-100 years. So somebody better have children, right?

God does do something when it is in our best interests, but why would God alter a fate that is not in someone's best interest ?

1) demonstrate a God exists, 2) demonstrate it can do anything, 3) demonstrate part of these things it does is in our best interests.

You have a big challenge when people born with defects cause death and problems that aren't in their best interest. So your claim here sounds completely invalid.

A Messenger of God can say that God exists and what God is, as much as we are able to know about God. I just pass on that information.

This claim sounds like you're a messenger of God since that is exactly what you did above. Is that what you are claiming? If so, prove it, as I'm not convinced.

I do not believe that anyone can ever "experience God" so I consider such a belief to be a fantasy. God is, and has from everlasting been, one and alone, self-subsisting, occupying the Seat of transcendent majesty, of supreme and inaccessible glory. That is why Jesus said that no one has ever seen God. The only way we can ever know about God is through His Messengers. They are the Tree beyond which there is no passing.

Here you go again with more claims and not a single thread of evidence that you're not making it up. So I don't believe you.

That is the fallacy of false equivalence since God is not equivalent to Elves and hobbits (except in the mind of an atheist.) They are not equivalent because there is no reason to believe that Elves or hobbits exist because there is no evidence of Elves or hobbits. However, there is a reason to believe in God because evidence for God exists. The great religions and civilizations alone are the evidence. There would be no civilizations were it not for the various Messengers of God who have come to earth.

There's no objective reason to b believe in God any more than to believe Hobbits exist. You seem to be assuming God is exempt from being a concept for which there is no evidence existing, and assigning it significance because it is a popular idea that many believe exists. This popularity is irrelevant. We look only at evidence at face value.

I never said that we cannot know that God exists, I said we cannot prove that God exists as a fact that everyone will accept, but we can know that God exists through the Messengers of God and the great religions and civilizations that were established because of them.. That is a logical proof.

The only way to know a God exists is via evidence that's accessible to an objective mind. This evidence doesn't exist.

Who said that God is supposed to answer? Do you set God's itinerary? Or it means you are wrong about what God is "supposed to do." If you could think logically you would figure out what God could not answer the prayers of all people giving them what they want. For one thing, what people want is not always in their best interests. For another thing what one person wants would interfere with what another person wants since they might want different things. We are all interconnected, so what one person does affects other people.

So many words and no evidence.

If a person is in a crisis they are in a crisis, and this has nothing to do with God. Some people turn to God in a crisis, some don't. I tend to handle my own crises. If I cry out for help, I know that I may or may not get help, and I accept that because I know that once I have done all I can do, my fate is in God's Hands. One never wins when they fight the Will of an omnipotent God.

More claims and no evidence.

 

[Trailblazer]

So if no one has any kids the human species will be extinct in about 90-100 years. So somebody better have children, right?

Somebody has to but everyone does not have to, and people do not have to have so many children. Ever heard of overpopulation? Be fruitful and multiply only was written for people living thousands of years ago, it no longer applies.

1) demonstrate a God exists, 2) demonstrate it can do anything, 3) demonstrate part of these things it does is in our best interests.

Religious beliefs are not demonstrable. I don't need to demonstrate it because I know it.

You have a big challenge when people born with defects cause death and problems that aren't in their best interest. So your claim here sounds completely invalid.

Only to you and people who think like you. Only God knows what is in our best interest because God is all-knowing.

This claim sounds like you're a messenger of God since that is exactly what you did above. Is that what you are claiming? If so, prove it, as I'm not convinced.

I am only the messenger for the Messenger. As a believer I just pass on the messages that He revealed.

Here you go again with more claims and not a single thread of evidence that you're not making it up. So I don't believe you.

I am not going around that evidence merry go round again.

There's no objective reason to b believe in God any more than to believe Hobbits exist. You seem to be assuming God is exempt from being a concept for which there is no evidence existing, and assigning it significance because it is a popular idea that many believe exists. This popularity is irrelevant. We look only at evidence at face value.

Did Hobbits establish entire civilizations?

The only way to know a God exists is via evidence that's accessible to an objective mind. This evidence doesn't exist.

The evidence for Baha'u'llah is accessible to an objective mind. That is why I believe He was a Messenger of God.

So many words and no evidence.
More claims and no evidence.

The claims and the evidence are all delineated on this post.

Questions for knowledgeable Bahai / followers of Baha'u'llah

 

[McBell]

Something unproven is not a fact...

Poor god...

 

[Wildswanderer]

Do you believe that nothing in science has been proven, or just certain things?

Nothing being proven is a basic tenet of science. Technically, gravity, for example, is a theory. We could discover something new that would be evidence that any current theories are incorrect. That's how science is supposed to work.

 

[Wildswanderer]

Poor god...

Why would God be poor? God has no need to be proven.

 

[McBell]

Why would God be poor? God has no need to be proven.

ROTFLMAO

And yet, here we are, on an internet message board being bombarded by attempts at proving gods existence.....

Though I am not sure how your bold empty claim about what god needs has to do with god not being a fact....

 

[Bear Wild]

Right because reality is not just the physical plane. We're also spiritual beings. We see only fragments of what is real. The more connected we are to God, the source of all life, the more reality we are able to absorb.

Except that god at least the way you perceive god is an a creation in the brain. That creation in your mind has meaning to you and your relationship to the world but gives you no understanding of the reality of the world. Our spiritualty is ours individually and like a concept of a god or goddess is how we relate to this world and how we feel about this world and helps us to connect with others of similar beliefs. The world is still real and although we can only approximate it with science, it still remains the best explanation.

You can believe in your god, find spirituality in this world or some imaginary world but at the same time accept what we learn from the scientific process and benefit from it. They are not mutually exclusive.

 

[Trailblazer]

Nothing being proven is a basic tenet of science. Technically, gravity, for example, is a theory. We could discover something new that would be evidence that any current theories are incorrect. That's how science is supposed to work.

I believe that is also how religion is supposed to work.

God's method is similar to the scientific method. In every age God reveals a new message through a Messenger in accordance with the needs of humans in that age. But the new message does not dispel the older messages from God; it simply extends and modifies them. The revelations from God that have already been tested remain solid.

Just as science evolves over time and needs updating, religion also evolves and needs updating.
What differs between science and religion is that scientists encourage updating and accept the updates whereas religious believers do not believe there are any updates so they reject all the updates, clinging tenaciously to their older religions. As such, these believers in the old religions live kind of a time warp, refusing to acknowledge that time has marched on and God has spoken again.

What do you think would happen if scientists did what religious believers do? All scientific progress would be halted and the peoples of the world would suffer. That is exactly what is going on right now with religion. Spiritual progress has been halted because people are clinging to the religions of the past, believing that their messages still apply to today's world.

 

[Wildswanderer]

ROTFLMAO

And yet, here we are, on an internet message board being bombarded by attempts at proving gods existence.....

Though I am not sure how your bold empty claim about what god needs has to do with god not being a fact....

Can anything be proven, really? Perhaps we are just living in an illusion.
But God makes it clear that he must be taken on faith.
You can know him beyond all reasonable doubt, but it still requires some faith.

 

[Wildswanderer]

Except that god at least the way you perceive god is an a creation in the brain.

That's only your opinion. No more viable than any other opinion. If God is not real, why would I trust anything any scientist told me? If we live in a world caused by blind random causation that would include every firing of the synapses of everybody's brains. It would be nothing but fizz in a bottle so to speak. You would think only what you were programmed by the whims of the random actions of the universe to think.

 

[Trailblazer]

But God makes it clear that he must be taken on faith.
You can know him beyond all reasonable doubt, but it still requires some faith.

Hebrews 11:6 And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who approaches Him must believe that He exists and that He rewards those who earnestly seek Him.

 

[Wildswanderer]

I believe that is also how religion is supposed to work.

God's method is similar to the scientific method. In every age God reveals a new message through a Messenger in accordance with the needs of humans in that age. But the new message does not dispel the older messages from God; it simply extends and modifies them. The revelations from God that have already been tested remain solid.

Just as science evolves over time and needs updating, religion also evolves and needs updating.
What differs between science and religion is that scientists encourage updating and accept the updates whereas religious believers do not believe there are any updates so they reject all the updates, clinging tenaciously to their older religions. As such, these believers in the old religions live kind of a time warp, refusing to acknowledge that time has marched on and God has spoken again.

What do you think would happen if scientists did what religious believers do? All scientific progress would be halted and the peoples of the world would suffer. That is exactly what is going on right now with religion. Spiritual progress has been halted because people are clinging to the religions of the past, believing that their messages still apply to today's world.

Go doesn't change. His Word endures forever. Sure he's still speaking, but he's not contradicting what he said earlier.

 

[Trailblazer]

Go doesn't change. His Word endures forever. Sure he's still speaking, but he's not contradicting what he said earlier.

God does not change, but God has spoken again and God is not contradicting anything that was said before.

God's message for humanity is different in every age. Differences are not contradictions.

The Bible will always be the Truth from God but the Christian dispensation has been superseded by the three Revelations from God that came after the Bible was written.

Dispensation

1. the divine ordering of the affairs of the world.
2. an appointment, arrangement, or favor, as by God.
3. a divinely appointed order or age:

e.g. the old Mosaic, or Jewish, dispensation; the new gospel, or Christian, dispensation.

Definition of dispensation | Dictionary.com

 

[Tiberius]

What sort of prayer do you pray. "Lord if you want me to believe then give me indisputable evidence of your existence. I'll believe in you if it does not mean having faith."
I hope He does give you something that you cannot deny. I have heard that it happens. You will still need to accept it in faith however.

I'm not praying to God. I'm simply open minded enough to accept the evidence, even if that means changing my viewpoint.

 

[F1fan]

Something unproven is not a fact...

Nothing being proven is a basic tenet of science. Technically, gravity, for example, is a theory. We could discover something new that would be evidence that any current theories are incorrect. That's how science is supposed to work.

So you don't consider gravity a fact?