Demanding proof of God

[eightandsand]

Which is why I will never understand why Catholics keep saying they know they have the revealed Truth. You are right. No one can have certainty. And if you can’t prove God with certainty, you certainly can’t prove the Catholic faith. It might be more precise if Catholics said they believe by faith they know the Truth.

Of course Catholics have the revealed Truth. Jesus Christ (Truth) passed His teaching authority onto the one, holy, and apostolic Church - the Catholic Church.

When you say, “you can’t prove God with certainty” you really mean that you can’t prove the existence of a Cosmic Genie with certainty. This is just another example of Satan’s attempt to tempt God.

Of course there is plenty of proof for the exisentence of God. But you are not “absolutely” FORCED to believe it. Catholicism rejects fideism and affirms the powers of human reason, even while recognizing that our use of reason is limited and tainted by sin. Science, properly understood and exercised, can unveil truths about God through his work of creation. The distinction between faith and reason is not between the irrational and rational, but between the humanly knowable and the humanly unknowable. For example, there is a big gap between my understanding of chemistry and that of a world-class chemist. Until I come to understand the chemical world from the inner experience of an expert chemical theoretician and to grasp the mathematics entailed in quantum mechanics, my knowledge of chemistry, beyond a certain, very limited point, must come from information accepted on faith. I must trust in the truths that scientists and mathematical physicists reveal to me, for what they know is beyond my own natural, rational powers to understand. But what they reveal, although above reason, does not contradict what I have come to know about chemistry by my own reason; rather, it completes it and corrects it, taking it above where it could naturally reach. Likewise, the Church says that there are truths beyond the powers of *all human reason, and that there is a being, God, whose intellect far surpasses our own, who does *know them, and whose knowledge, revealed by faith, corrects and completes our own.

 

[CMatt25]

When you say, “you can’t prove God with certainty” you really mean that you can’t prove the existence of a Cosmic Genie with certainty. This is just another example of Satan’s attempt to tempt God.

Uh… no. I meant what I said. But thanks for sharing your belief and faith. I believe in God and have faith in His existence too. I even believe His Son died on the cross to save us from our sins. Resurrected on the 3rd day from the tomb and ascended into heaven. And I’ll trust you weren’t calling me Satan. God bless and peace.

 

[slotty]

God is more concerned that he should not force an association on me, than that I should give informed consent as to what kind of relationship I want to have with Him?

Yes.

God wants it to be totally true, authentic and freely chosen not something forced into.

Take something simple.

If you feel like a steak & veggies and you freely chose it then you will probably enjoy it.
On the other hand If you would prefer a pizza and someone forces the steak and veggies on you chances are you won’t enjoy the steak & veggies.

God is so concerned with humanity freely chosing him that he won’t ever force us to make the choice and will allow us to live as if he was never there if that’s what we want

 

[interestedman]

When non-believers demand that I show proof of God’s existence, I typically ignore it simply because with that attitude, probably nothing you show them will be proof enough to them and you’d just be wasting your time and your breath. They have to have a heart and mind open enough to receive what you are telling them. (In my opinion, LOL!)

They have to have a mind open enough because your “proof” isn’t sufficient. “Feeling it in my heart” is not sufficient. I bet there are a lot of people in cults that feel their cult leader is the messiah in their heart.

Miracles can’t be proof of Christianity either. First of all, just because we don’t know how or why something happened doesn’t mean there is a super natural power behind it. Secondly, even if there WAS a supernatural power behind some miracle it in no way proves the story of Jesus or the gospels or even that the supernatural power that was behind the miracle is benevolent, omnipotent, etc. Maybe it was Buddha? Maybe it was some alien that we have never heard of.

 

[interestedman]

Personally, I believe that God shows his existence every moment of my day. If we choose to ignore those signs, well, then we are like those in Plato’s cave, seeing shadows on the wall from a false light, thinking that it’s reality.

Anyway, just my thoughts.

So because a tree looks nice 2,000 years ago God sent down his only son to die for our sins? Seems logical

 

[interestedman]

Likewise, so what if a lot of saints, plus a whole extra portion of un-canonized people have claimed to have visions of God and his angels. Maybe they just pretended to and then staged the miracles.

A lot of people have claimed to have been abducted by aliens, or have seen bigfoot. I bet you could go to any mental hospital and find people that see all sorts of things.

 

[interestedman]

My response:

Sorry I can’t do that. My God does not impose his will upon any of his creation. He allows us the choice to have a relationship with him. If there were to be undeniable proof of his existance then we would have no choice and the relationship would be forced upon us.

If someone chooses to have a relationship with him and that relationship grows and that is a wonderful thing for that individual.
Conversely if someone had the foundation of the relationship without being able to ever chose… Well it would be akin to constantly holding a gun to your head and demanding that we be friends.

My response: ok, so you have no proof. Great.

 

[interestedman]

If he is sincere about wanting to know, you might want to give him CS Lewis’ Mere Christianity". Good common sense Christianity. I find that most atheists you see on the forum here have an extremely rigid faith in atheism and are not really interested in learning anything about Christianity.

Most atheists you see on here are probably former Christians.

 

[interestedman]

And he does. For millions of Catholics around the world.

Just like Krishna lets himself be known to millions of Hindus.

 

[User124]

Ask the atheist, “What kind of proof?”

Also, ask the atheist if he has proof of his own existence.

Do you really nag your head over a proof for your existence?

There is a lot of proof for our existence.

None proof of any god’s existence.

If it happens and there is a god(s), which one?

If we exists, does it mean that there must be a designer?

If a designer exists, who designed that designer?

This road is too long to stop, we may get tired before arriving.

 

[User124]

Just like Krishna lets himself be known to millions of Hindus.

Exactly, a god or gods exist let’s say, fine what god(s)?

 

[interestedman]

Exactly, a god or gods exist let’s say, fine what god(s)?

I love that most “proofs” I have heard for “god” in no way even come close to proving Jesus, the trinity, the gospels, or even a loving or personal god.

 

[danserr]

So, an atheist came up to me the other and demanded that I show the Atheist proof of God’s existence. I told him that the efforts of cause and effect were relevant to the circumstances that require the necessity of a being that would will something from nothing. Yet the atheist states,“This is not proof.”

I’m sure this doesn’t belong here, I’ll be content to know where it does so that I can post these sorts of questions there.

I simply didn’t know what more to say.

Can someone help me? I just don’t know what to say. And I would rather deal with this now before it causes me unnecessary apprehension.

-Karl

I would suggest exploring the writings on this site. There are scholarly ones, but also popular lever ones to get you started. The author is a well known Christian philosopher and I find his stuff interesting and useful.

reasonablefaith.org/popular-articles

In specific answer to your question, I don’t like to talk about proof it risks confusing people since they think of proof as meaning mathematical certainty. But we believe in all sorts of things that it would be foolish to doubt that we don’t have mathematical certainty for. I can’t prove with mathematical certainty that the American Revolution happened. But the evidence is so good, it would be absurd to doubt it. So with God I think it is better to talk about there being very good evidence for God.

 

[clem456]

Most atheists you see on here are probably former Christians.

And many Christians are former atheists. Is this line of reasoning advancing your understanding of the world around you?

 

[eightandsand]

Uh… no. I meant what I said. But thanks for sharing your belief and faith. I believe in God and have faith in His existence too. I even believe His Son died on the cross to save us from our sins. Resurrected on the 3rd day from the tomb and ascended into heaven. And I’ll trust you weren’t calling me Satan. God bless and peace.

No, I wasn’t calling you Satan. That was obvious.

 

[nordskoven]

Fulfilled prophecy is proof of God’s existence, including 300+ on Christ’s life alone. Check out the literal translation of Chernobyl, “Wormwood” per John’s Apocalypse and poisoned water implications. That one had all the atheist Communists hitting the Good Book. Also coming up on the prophetic timeline is the permanent annihilation of Damascus, the oldest continuously occupied city on Earth.

 

[mgoforth]

When non-believers demand that I show proof of God’s existence, I typically ignore it simply because with that attitude, probably nothing you show them will be proof enough to them and you’d just be wasting your time and your breath. They have to have a heart and mind open enough to receive what you are telling them. (In my opinion, LOL!)

I agree with this. Please remember Jesus said:

"Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you to pieces." Matthew 7:6

As DWGarvin said, it sounds like this person was trying to tear your faith to pieces. Be very careful around such people. If you look carefully, you’ll notice a few of them in this thread too, trying to put doubts in your mind. :tsktsk: The best thing you can do is ignore their attacks and pray for them.

It’s tempting to try to provide compelling evidence and force others to see the truth…but none of it will work unless they want to see it first. Jesus always spoke in parables to the crowds that followed Him, but He only revealed the deeper meaning to his disciples because they already had faith.

 

[Bitternolonger]

As a former non-believer, I would tell him that if he wants proof of God’s existence, that he is going to need to find out for himself by inviting God to have a personal relationship with him. The proof that he seeks comes in knowing God. As others have said, God does not force his will upon us.

I would tell him to talk to God as he would a friend and say “I don’t know that you exist. But if you do, I ask that you would soften my heart so that I may invite you in.”

I would ask your friend to read Acts, specifically the stoning of Stephen and the conversion of Saul on the road to Damascus and then read the letters of Paul.

By the grace of God, I pray that the Holy Spirit knocks him off his feet with that incredible feeling of joy, love and peace that comes with being filled with the Holy Spirit.

 

[Charlemagne_II]

There is no way you can prove god to an atheist. He has to prove God to himself, mostly by opening his mind and his heart to God. So long as he doesn’t want to believe in God, for any one of a thousand reasons, he will not believe.

 

[eightandsand]

Do you really nag your head over a proof for your existence?

There is a lot of proof for our existence.

None proof of any god’s existence.

If it happens and there is a god(s), which one?

If we exists, does it mean that there must be a designer?

If a designer exists, who designed that designer?

This road is too long to stop, we may get tired before arriving.

The Dogmatic Constitution of the Catholic Faith has made it clear that, “There is one true and living God, creator and lord of heaven and earth”, and that “this one true God, by his goodness and almighty power…brought into being from nothing the twofold created order, that is the spiritual and the bodily, the angelic and the earthly, and thereafter the human which is, in a way, common to both since it is composed of spirit and body.” Morever, this God could "be known with certainty from the consideration of created things, by the natural power of human reason."

There is plenty of scientific evidence for the existence of this Intelligent Designer, even if that scientific evidence is currently censored from the public classroom. Just look at how they treat Michael Behe and other proponents of ID. It is sickening. The origin of life was not an extremely improbable event. The origin of life was deliberately, purposely arranged, just as the fundamental laws and constants and many other anthropic features of nature were deliberately, purposely arranged. The evidence can’t be ignored anymore.

Darwinism is a theory of evolution that assumes, without any evidence, that evolution is the result of chance, blind fate, and brute necessity, and explains the evidence for evolution accordingly. But it is quite possible to have a non-Darwinian account for the evidence of evolution. Evolutionary theory didn’t have to follow Darwin into the 20th century; it could have followed Wallace, Mivart, and other evolutionists like them. Catholics make a distinction between Darwinism and evolution. You see, Darwinism is in no way novel. Darwinism is a necessary and ancient part of the entire materialist creed, going straight back to Epicurus. Dawkins is just Epicurus repackaged with shiny wrapping for the modern sheeple to consume. Modern science (materialism) was designed to exclude the Designer. Science, for the materialist, is not about truth-seeking. It is about therapy, about achieving “ataraxia” (Greek for “freedom from disturbance,” as Epicurus put it) from the fear of hell and the guilt of sin and belief in the existence of the gods. Materialists are convinced *a priori, by argument *(rather than by evidence) that God does not exist. Unless blinded by devotion to materialism, a reasonable person could infer that the existence of a creative Intelligence as the cause of the fine-tuned universe is far less miraculous than the workings of Blind Chance.

Now, as to your question of the identity of the Designer. The evidence is very strong that Christ was exactly who He claimed to be. Even prominent atheists like British skeptic Albert Henry Ross, who originally set out to disprove the “myth” of the Resurrection, ended up being forced to admit that all the alternatives to the historical reality of the Resurrection (conspiracy, hoax, lies, hallucinations, myth, etc.) ended up being even less credible than the even they sought to discredit. The evidence exists. You are not FORCED to accept it. Even Richard Dawkins, in his debate with John Lennox at the Oxford Museum of Natural History, was forced to concede that the Gospel accounts are reliable historical accounts.

Atheists (I prefer “Materialists” or “Anti-Theists”) have a very good case for the non-existence of a cosmic genie, but very weak one for the non-existence of the Creator. Most educated Anti-Theists that I have run into do in fact know that the one, true God exists. It is not so much that they deny His existence but rather they hate Him for their own painful, suffering existence (which is usually the result of their sinful lifestyles). Their materialism functions for them exactly has it has functioned since the time of Epicurus - as a form of therapy.