If God existed would there be proof?

[Trailblazer]

Which deity?

For purposed of the OP it does not matter which deity.

 

[Trailblazer]

It would mean that if God were necessary, it would be for reasons unknown to humanity.

Even if God cannot be proven to exist there is evidence, which constitutes proof for some people.
Religious believers can know the reasons why God is necessary by reading their scriptures.

 

[firedragon]

I think that there is proof, but not everyone recognizes the proof.

Its not a matter of thinking.

Anything that exists, has proof that it does. Thats simple logic. We may not have discovered them.

 

[Trailblazer]

Any suggestions?
Perhaps you think that creatures shouldn't die? Would that work?

It wouldn't work with the present setup, but God could have set it up differently since God is omnipotent and omniscient.

 

[Trailblazer]

I have to come at the question another way: "if there is neither proof nor evidence for a thing, what reason would there be to suppose it true?"

I've never seen any evidence whatever for flying wallabies in Australia -- what reason could I have to think they might be there, flitting silently just behind me all the time and never letting me see them?

I've never seen any proof that there were people who could utter curses that would cause all of my animals to die -- so why would I assume the rather quaint old lady across the road is doing it?

No, if there is neither proof nor evidence for a thing, there would be no reason to suppose it exists.

 

[Trailblazer]

Wouldn't it be easier and far more efficient to just present his holiness to everyone in a way that all can experience objectively? Why play around? Just cut to the chase and avoid all the death, destruction, pain, suffering, and confusion.

I don't know what God does what God does... only God knows.
However, it is logical to conclude that if that is what God wanted to do He would have done it, since God's omnipotence and omniscience would have made that possible, so the fact that this is not what we see happening means that if God exists God did not want it to be that way.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

No, if there is neither proof nor evidence for a thing, there would be no reason to suppose it exists.

And there is where I find myself.

The ideas of "God," of "magic," of that which we could not comprehend were humankind's very first attempts at "science," at "philosophy," at simply trying to figure out, "who am I, where do I come from, where am I going?"

And I, for one, can't fault the ancients for the answers they came up with. They couldn't have begun to figure out how to make microscopes (first they had to invent glass!), how to understand why somebody got sick, nor what to do about it, or where the wisdom of the tribal leader went when that leader died and couldn't provide anymore guidance. But they tried -- of course they tried! What else could they do?

Do I think they were ignorant? Of course I do, but that only means "lacking knowledge," and knowledge is hard to come by. But give us sufficient time, and we humans have proven that we will come by it, one way or another. Maybe not all of it, maybe not yet, but if we don't stop seeking, well, more and more and more.

But still, the ancients tried. And they did their very best! I don't deny that there is much that is good that has come out of ancient human thought -- and I know why it did, too. It's because they were human. It's because they understood how interconnected they were. It's because they knew they needed one another that they could (in every religion) develop a "Golden Rule." This is good, rational, sensible, moral thinking -- and every religion got there. And they all got there because every religion consisted of the same membership -- humans.

 

[syo]

If God existed would there be proof?

Because of Hermes, the God messenger, the existence of Gods is real. The proof is the notion of Gods, because of Hermes.

 

[firedragon]

The ideas of "God," of "magic," of that which we could not comprehend were humankind's very first attempts at "science," at "philosophy," at simply trying to figure out, "who am I, where do I come from, where am I going?"

Do you have any empirical evidence for this statement?

 

[muhammad_isa]

It wouldn't work with the present setup, but God could have set it up differently since God is omnipotent and omniscient.

Easy to say.
Exactly how would you envisage such a set up?

 

[Truthseeker]

God gives free choice (good to heaven, bad to hell).

But there are requirements for free choice.

If the hand of God visibly reached down from heaven, and let his presence be known to all (including atheists), all would believe, and likely almost all would be good. Free choice would likely not exist.

So, God must hide. God's miracles must appear to be coincidences are weird facts of science. For example, the statue that appears to drink milk could be explained by capillary action (Van Der Waals force, which is electrostatic force that is apparent on surfaces).

This gives freedom of choice to both the theists and atheists.

I'm not sure it would take away free will, but God does want to divide the faithful to Him from the faithless.

When God warns us with prophecies, such as Revelation (which is a prophecy from God telling us that we will face God's wrath if we attack Iraq, and warning us that the most powerful nation in the world is the Whore of Babylon (source: Revelation 17:18), and that the demon called the dragon was President GHW Bush, and the demon called the beast was President W. Bush. When God predicted the various punishments, God knew that electing the wrong person would create an avalanche of various problems.

That is, God knew that the same president who made a torture camp at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba (and many other torture camps around the world), was also filled with many other deadly sins (excessive drinking, excessive narcotic use), and sins of apathy (Hurricane Katrina), sins of pride (greatest country in the world), sins of bearing false witness (calling Iraqi official Doctor Death, in order to promote a war), etc. So, the wrong president would create all of the woes of the world.

The the faithful, we should not have attacked Iraq. Those with no faith, defied God, and attacked Iraq so that they would feel a tiny bit safer, knowing that some country (albiet, a country that had nothing to do with terroris) was being destroyed. Americans traded their souls to the devil in exchange for feeling a tad bit safer by attacking the innnocent.

To most Christians (who, by the way, have no faith in God) it all seems to be a coincidence, or they believe the Canadian who tears down America (Rush Limbaugh) and blame others for the problems that we now face.

But the world is a mess today, and that is because we elected the wrong president, and defied God by doing so.

Faithless theists would blame others or say it is all a coincidence. But, those of faith, who believe Revelation, would know that it is not a coincidence. God knew all along what the consequences would be, and even had them written in Revelation (a chapter of the New Testament bible).

The fact that events unfolded precisely as predicted in Revelation (including a part of Revelation 15....seven plagues), is a miracle. But it is a miracle only for those who believe in God. For those who defied God, and attacked Iraq, Revelation is a mystery. They can't figure out where Babylon was (though it has been there for thousands of years). They try rewritting or changing the meaning of Revelation in order to shed blame (saying that there must be some hitherto undiscovered Babylon that no one ever heard of). But God already thought of that and made sure that Revelation, itself, states that some will try to change the meaning of Revelation, and when they do, they will be written out of the book of life forever, and burn in the fiery lake of fire of the bottomless pit of hell for all eternity.

You have to believe to see. You have to have faith in God in order to not attack Iraq while everyone else is afraid of terrorism.

I don't believe you have to have the interpretation of Revelations you have given to be faithful to God. I want to not debate when I can, but I can't help myself this time. You will possibly end up calling everybody who disagrees with your interpretation faithless with God, and that does not unite us all.

 

[EtuMalku]

I don't know what God does what God does... only God knows.
However, it is logical to conclude that if that is what God wanted to do He would have done it, since God's omnipotence and omniscience would have made that possible, so the fact that this is not what we see happening means that if God exists God did not want it to be that way.

I think it's quite a bit more logical to assume there is no god (Occam's Razor).

 

[DNB]

Depends on the nature of the evidence.

Inductive reasoning can never reach the level of "proof," regardless of how much evidence you have.

Evidence can be ambiguous, therefore, one can argue that evidence is not necessarily irrefutable proof. It can only lead to proof once all other ambiguities are eliminated.

 

[Truthseeker]

Imo, the knowledge should not have been with God alone, if God expected us to endure so much suffering in this world, but as we both know, suffering is not evenly distributed, which is another problem as I see it. There is no explanation as to why some people suffer so much more than others but we are supposed to be grateful for our suffering because it is supposed to make us more spiritual. If that's really true I should be really spiritual by now, but I do not feel very spiritual. .

If He reveals there is joy and gladness there, why do you have to know how it is there? I guess it's your anxiety.

Those who suffer more for no responsibility for their suffering will get compensated more, like my older brother Philip or you. Suffering gives us the potential of being spiritual, it's not automatic, according to my understanding. I'm sorry you suffer so much, and don't feel spiritual, but I think in reality you are spiritual. I'm not worried about you in the next life, which lasts forever. Cheer up, you are 69 now, you don't have that far to go.

 

[Truthseeker]

Also this earth had to be a place for God to give us humans moral freedom. That includes free will to cause or stop the suffering of others.

I can definitely subscribe to that.

And yes those left behind grieve but God said that He would dry all our tears.

Blessed are those who mourn, for they shall be comforted. It may be implied there that you have to be receptive to being comforted by God.

 

[Trailblazer]

Easy to say.
Exactly how would you envisage such a set up?

I was waiting for that question.
I would/could not envision it because I am not the all-knowing God, the Creator of the universe.

 

[Trailblazer]

I think it's quite a bit more logical to assume there is no god (Occam's Razor).

We all have that choice...
What is logical to one person is not logical to another person because we all reason differently.

 

[Trailblazer]

If He reveals there is joy and gladness there, why do you have to know how it is there? I guess it's your anxiety.

Maybe it is my anxiety, or maybe I won't like what other people consider joy and gladness. I mean I don't like what other people are joyful and glad about in THIS life, so why would it be any different in the next life? If being near to God is supposed to bring joy and gladness I will be out of luck, since I do not want to be near to God.

However I do have to concede to the fact that aside from losing cats and people through death it is the material world that causes all my suffering, so not having to be in a material world might mean no more suffering, but that would depend upon what I was doing in the next world. I don't want to just sit around doing nothing and if there are no cats that would be hell.

Those who suffer more for no responsibility for their suffering will get compensated more, like my older brother Philip or you. Suffering gives us the potential of being spiritual, it's not automatic, according to my understanding. I'm sorry you suffer so much, and don't feel spiritual, but I think in reality you are spiritual. I'm not worried about you in the next life, which lasts forever. Cheer up, you are 69 now, you don't have that far to go.

Thanks, but that is just your personal opinion according to how you interpret the Writings.
Forever is a very long time, what if I hate the next life? I am with the atheists in this one.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Even if God cannot be proven to exist there is evidence, which constitutes proof for some people.

Was this supposed to be coherent?

Religious believers can know the reasons why God is necessary by reading their scriptures.

If this were true, they would have proof if God.

So you've changed your mind?

 

[Brian2]

He would be relevant in regards to having done it. But irrelevant in regards to us actually knowing it.

Even if God did it, we have no clue which God we are talking about, it could be the Christian God, it might be Odin, Allah, one of the Hindu gods, or a God we didn't even knew existed or there might not be any God at all, which ever of these you choose is irrelevant, if said God is undetectable.

Its for the same reason that science doesn't deal with the "why" question as well. Its irrelevant and is not considered possible to answer. So science can tell us how rain is caused, how the sun produce light, the process behind it etc. But doesn't deal with the question of why does it rain? why does the sun shine? why is there life rather than no life?

The why question is something we fill in and in most cases without any evidence for it. When I say in most cases, it is because, we can explain why an animal need to eat, which is obviously because it would die if it didn't, but we can't answer the question of why does animals have to eat in the first place? And this is where, we can throw in God and say that he designed it that way, but that is not an answer, it is simply filling a gap without any good reason for doing so.

Sounds right.