How certain are we that God exists?

[wmw]

The written evidence of the Bible is very germain to this discussion.

Creator revealing himself to the created
That were events in the history of the Jews about which it was reported that God revealed Himself as via visible entities and also with accompaniment of fire and smoke and thunder and lightning. Nowadays there are no such visitations from God, so please just focus on the artifacts of God in the universe, the greatest of which is the universe itself; and infer from them to the creator ‘Craftsman’ that is God Himself; wherefore, no need to look for Him in the midst of fire and smoke and lightning and thunder – start with your nose.

I wonder what the Egyptians saw instead of a pillar of smoke and fire? On the one hand I agree that every discription of each encounter may be taken as story telling that has grown with the telling, but to dismiss the Bible entirely makes no sense. To deem all history to a dust pile of nothing learned is to be swollowed up whole into the modernists point of view and all their culture of anti-religiousness as well. I you want to limit your discussion to certian aspects of how we can know God exists feel free, but don’t claim that you are exploring the whole question of God’s certainty if you exclude all the evidence of history.

 

[Charlemagne_III]

teachings and actsSo, we are in concurrence that we can and we do inexhorably conclude to the existence of God the creator of the universe by our concentration to “infer to the existence of God as the creator of the universe from the existence of the universe”.

There is no fallacious verbal sleight of hand in that undertaking.

Everyone, do you concur to that?

KingCoil

I agree that the inference is a valid one, but I don’t agree that it is absolutely valid so far as the atheist is concerned. This is because the atheist lacks the dimension of hope in his conception of God. Nothing cerebral can persuade him because he does not desire to be persuaded.

 

[tonyrey]

1. I am absolutely certain that I exist.
2. I am absolutely certain that others exist.
3. I am absolutely certain that the universe exists.
4. I am absolutely certain that love and hate exist.

These are all certainties of experience. Certainties derived from induction and deduction, however, are less than absolutely certain because they require “leaps” of assent, some of which are more subject to cerebral confirmation than others. Yes, cerebrally we can derive probable certainty about the existence of God and the immortality of the soul. But we cannot derive absolute certainty about either without the experience of either. That is why God gives us avenues of approach to him other than the cerebral ones. Hope is such an avenue; and though it is probably the least stressed of the three theological virtues of faith, hope, and charity, hope is the most fundamental. Without hope, all is lost. Without hope we might legitimately consider suicide as a solution to all our problems. Without hope we are not likely to find love in our lives, nor to find ourselves lovable. Without hope we are not likely to love God, nor feel that we are loved by God.

Irrefutable, Charlie!

 

[Charlemagne_III]

Irrefutable, Charlie!

Are you absolutely certain of that?

 

[KingCoil]

Originally Posted by wmw
Fr. Spitzer at the Magis Center web site does a very good job of explaining how probable God is. He does reach a number; so, absolute certainty he doesn’t claim. Though it is so high a probability that it is ridiculous and that might be a problem. People cant imagine it being that likely and tend to just dismiss it. Its painful to see peoples hardness of heart,but to see scientists have to harden thier minds againsts seeing the facts it also forces me to believe in the devil as well.

Let us concur that on deciding on the certainty of the existence of an entity, we have to first before anything else agree on the concept of the entity.

With the search for the existing God, we concur that God in concept is the creator cause of the universe.

Creator cause of the universe: that implicates that God is more huge than the universe as to encompass the universe, and God is also more subtle than the most minutest particles, fields, forces, laws of physics and laws of nature making up the composition of the universe, so that God is permeating the nooks and crannies of the universe.

We cannot as humans be directly certain of God’s existence because we cannot be in direct contact as to touch God, the way we can touch our nose or touch each other.

So, that leaves only inferential certainty for us humans.

For all affairs of mankind, inferential certainty is necessary and is sufficient when we cannot have direct certainty.

So, let me show you how we arrive at the inferential certainty of God’s existence:

1. The universe exists.
2. In the universe everything in it has a beginning.
3. Wherefore everything in the universe has need of a cause to bring it to existence.
4. Next, scientists tell us the universe as a whole has a beginning.
5. Wherefore the whole universe as one item has need of a cause to bring it to existence.
6. Let us go into the universe to observe and examine everything and come to conclusion that everything in it has a beginning: so everything in the universe has a cause.
7. For the universe as a whole and as one item, scientists tell us it has a beginning: so the universe as a whole and as one item has a cause.
8. Conclusion: we have inferential certainty of the existence of the cause of the universe as one whole, one item, and also everything in the universe that makes up the composition of the universe, and we identify the cause of the universe as corresponding to the concept of God in the Christian faith, namely, as the creator of the universe.

That is the argument from the concept of God to the existence of God by way of inference from the logic and the facts: that everything with a beginning has a cause (the logic) and the facts that everything making up the universe does have a beginning, and scientists tell us the whole universe has a beginning.

KingCoil

 

[jochoa]

I am not into Jesus Christ, but just into God as creator of the universe.

Fair enough, there was a time when I wasn’t into Jesus Christ, which was necessary for me to recognize that Jesus is the Creator of the Universe, the Holy Trinity.

Since we are both certain that the Creator of the Everything exists, let’s explore more of who this person is by resolving to concur on the following:
As the person who created everything, what is the greatest creation possible, why create it, and what must happen in order to fulfill the creation?

In order to come to concurrence, I propose we begin by sharing/comparing/developing ideas of the greatest creation possible.

I understand the greatest creation possible of the person who created everything to be an infinite amount of true friends. Another way of wording this creation is other beings equal in capability and morality for the experience of unbreakable peace with unending joy. And the simplest way of wording this creation is Love.

What is your understanding of the greatest creation possible by the person who created everything?

 

[KingCoil]

Originally Posted by KingCoil
I am not into Jesus Christ, but just into God as creator of the universe.

Let us just limit the entity greater than which nothing can be conceived to God, no need to bring in Jesus Christ – do that when you have come to the inferential certainty of God’s existence, then that should be a thread you will start.

No need to ask what is the greatest achievement possible to be accomplished by God.

That is unnecessary complication of whatever you are trying to get into – and a waste of time except for entertainment of the mind, but fruitless for any insight into reality.

Don’t talk about possibility when there is already the actuality of the universe which we want to support the transit of the concept of God as creator of the universe to His existence in the universe, yes, as the cause of the universe.

KingCoil

 

[RedFox0456]

I have to disagree that mathematics is only in the mind of man and that without man it would not exist. We DISCOVER the principals of mathematics - we don’t create them. Therefore, mathematics is in fact the universal language. Hence, concepts originating from a mathematical framework are valid.

 

[jochoa]

No need to ask what is the greatest achievement possible to be accomplished by God.

That is unnecessary complication of whatever you are trying to get into…

My purpose is to help you recognize that being a defector from Catholicism is an unnecessary complication of whatever you are trying to get into and to help you have direct certainty of God’s existence.

Thanks for the very enjoyable and educational discussion! I look forward to considering more of your understandings!

 

[KingCoil]

I have to disagree that mathematics is only in the mind of man and that without man it would not exist. We DISCOVER the principals of mathematics - we don’t create them. Therefore, mathematics is in fact the universal language. Hence, concepts originating from a mathematical framework are valid.

I love to learn from you, where is mathematics when there was no man yet?

KingCoil

 

[KingCoil]

Originally Posted by KingCoil
No need to ask what is the greatest achievement possible to be accomplished by God.

I am not arguing my thread because I am a defector from Catholicism.

Were I not any defector from Catholicism, I would still be arguing my thread.

Let me see if you know the position of the Catholic Church on how reason is the foundation of faith, so that unless you have reason your faith would be of no avail to you in terms of making sense.

That is the dogma of the Catholic Church, that man must be first rational before he can take up the Christian Catholic faith in a manner that makes sense to himself.

Anyway, tell me where I have gone against the Catholic faith in my expatiation and advocacy of the present thread.

KingCoil

 

[Charlemagne_III]

I love to learn from you, where is mathematics when there was no man yet?

KingCoil

Mathematics is in the mind of God.

Or as Mathematician Paul Dirac put it:

“God is a mathematician of a very high order and He used advanced mathematics in constructing the universe.”

 

[KingCoil]

What I aspire after in every thread I have started here is to conduct a tidy discussion, no bringing in extraneous matters that are not any contribution to the resolution of the thread, but just distractions.

KingCoil

 

[jochoa]

Let me see if you know the position of the Catholic Church on how reason is the foundation of faith, so that unless you have reason your faith would be of no avail to you in terms of making sense.

That is the dogma of the Catholic Church, that man must be first rational before he can take up the Christian Catholic faith in a manner that makes sense to himself.

Thanks for sharing this dogma with me. I definitely enjoy reading, reflecting on Church Teachings, and have no issue with them!

Anyway, tell me where I have gone against the Catholic faith in my expatiation and advocacy of the present thread.

From the following posts:

That is why man is limited to inferential certainty of God’s existence.

…that is why we cannot have direct human certainty of God’s existence, but only inferential human certainty,…

Your belief that man is limited to inferential certainty of God’s existence is incomplete to Church Teachings. Please consider the following from the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

460 “For the Son of God became man so that we might become God.”

Since man can become God, then man can be directly certain of God’s existence.

 

[KingCoil]

Thanks, Charlem, for your post

KingCoil:

I love to learn from you [RedFox0456], where is mathematics when there was no man yet?

Mathematics is in the mind of God.

Or as Mathematician Paul Dirac put it:

“God is a mathematician of a very high order and He used advanced mathematics in constructing the universe.”

See, you concur with me when there was no man yet there has always been the mind of God where He keeps all mathematics.

You recall this post earlier from me:

…]

From a mathematical point of view, absolute certainty would mean zero probability of anything else. – Redfox0456
Do you notice that mathematics is purely in the mind of man, so if there is no man, there is no human mind to think and do mathematics in his mind; but there is still God with His mind; and God does not put into existence everything that is in His mind: still we know that the universe exists, and that is because He wanted to put something in His mind, the idea of the universe, into objective reality, wherefore the universe exists. That is why I always insist that we must transit from the realm of concepts in our mind to the realm of objects in the factual universe, otherwise it is all thinking which can be logical but still fiction in the mind, nothing of reality in the universe.

…]

KingCoil

ANNEX
Part 1


Part 2

 

[KingCoil]

Originally Posted by KingCoil
Let me see if you know the position of the Catholic Church on how reason is the foundation of faith, so that unless you have reason your faith would be of no avail to you in terms of making sense.

I think you have not quoted the Catechism faithfully.
Catholic Catechism:

459 The Word became flesh to be our model of holiness: “Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me.” "I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father, but by me."74 On the mountain of the Transfiguration, the Father commands: "Listen to him!"75 Jesus is the model for the Beatitudes and the norm of the new law: "Love one another as I have loved you."76 This love implies an effective offering of oneself, after his example.77

**460 The Word became flesh to make us “partakers of the divine nature”:78 "For this is why the Word became man, and the Son of God became the Son of man: so that man, by entering into communion with the Word and thus receiving divine sonship, might become a son of God."79 "For the Son of God became man so that we might become God."80 "The only-begotten Son of God, wanting to make us sharers in his divinity, assumed our nature, so that he, made man, might make men gods."81 **

II. THE INCARNATION
461 Taking up St. John’s expression, “The Word became flesh”,82 the Church calls “Incarnation” the fact that the Son of God assumed a human nature in order to accomplish our salvation in it. In a hymn cited by St. Paul, the Church sings the mystery of the Incarnation:
Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. And being found in human form he humbled himself and became obedient unto death, even death on a cross.83

vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p122a3p1.htm

Always quote your source faithfully.

KingCoil

 

[KingCoil]

Correction:

This quote:

Jochoa:

460 “For the Son of God became man so that we might become God.”
Since man can become God, then man can be directly certain of God’s existence.

should read:

Jochoa:

460 “For the Son of God became man so that we might become God.”

Since man can become God, then man can be directly certain of God’s existence.

Sorry for the typo from my part.

Dear Jochoa, I really wonder how you can extrapolate paragraph 460 from the Catholic Catechism into a rejection of inferential certainty of God’s existence in favor of direct certainty.

KingCoil

 

[jochoa]

I think you have not quoted the Catechism faithfully.

Somehow you accidentally quoted me incorrectly. I only quoted CCC#480 - 80. You somehow included my reflection of the teaching in the Catechism quoting. Either way, the Catholic Teaching still leads to man knowing God with direct certainty.

 

[jochoa]

Sorry for the typo from my part.

Thanks for catching it, and no worries.

Dear Jochoa, I really wonder how you can extrapolate paragraph 460 from the Catholic Catechism into a rejection of inferential certainty of God’s existence in favor of direct certainty.

I am not sharing that CCC#460 rejects inferential certainty because I find it to support both inferential and direct certainty. However, since I know CCC#460 more fully recognizes direct human certainty of God, and we, in this discussion, have already concurred on inferential certainty of God’s existence, it is only logical to me that we seek to concur on direct human certainty of God because direct human certainty of God yields the Heavenly Experience!

Thank you very much for all your time, consideration, and sharing of your perspective! I have greatly enjoyed our discussion, and I look forward to more!

 

[GaryTaylor]

faith - belief that is not based on proof.

In the historical conditions in which he finds himself, however, man experiences many difficulties in coming to know God by the light of reason alone:

Though human reason is, strictly speaking, truly capable by its own natural power and light of attaining to a true and certain knowledge of the one personal God, who watches over and controls the world by his providence, and of the natural law written in our hearts by the Creator; yet there are many obstacles which prevent reason from the effective and fruitful use of this inborn faculty. For the truths that concern the relations between God and man wholly transcend the visible order of things, and, if they are translated into human action and influence it, they call for self-surrender and abnegation. The human mind, in its turn, is hampered in the attaining of such truths, not only by the impact of the senses and the imagination, but also by disordered appetites which are the consequences of original sin. So it happens that men in such matters easily persuade themselves that what they would not like to be true is false or at least doubtful.

Admittedly, in speaking about God like this, our language is using human modes of expression; nevertheless it really does attain to God himself, though unable to express him in his infinite simplicity. Likewise, we must recall that “between Creator and creature no similitude can be expressed without implying an even greater dissimilitude”;17 and that "concerning God, we cannot grasp what he is, but only what he is not, and how other beings stand in relation to him."18

IN BRIEF

44 Man is by nature and vocation a religious being. Coming from God, going toward God, man lives a fully human life only if he freely lives by his bond with God.

45 Man is made to live in communion with God in whom he finds happiness: When I am completely united to you, there will be no more sorrow or trials; entirely full of you, my life will be complete (St. Augustine, Conf. 10, 28, 39: PL 32, 795}.

46 When he listens to the message of creation and to the voice of conscience, man can arrive at certainty about the existence of God, the cause and the end of everything

scborromeo.org/ccc/p1s1c1.htm

Faith is supernaturally imposed virtue. You have a “responsibility” to maintain. without the action of God, faith will never come to reside in our soul. Faith is the first of the three theological virtues

Losing Faith: “This may perhaps explain why those who have had the misfortune to apostatize from the faith are often the most virulent in their attacks upon the grounds of faith”—even more so than those who never were blessed with the gift of faith in the first place.

“Keep the Faith”…you can lose hope, you cannot lose faith less you, “choose” to not cooperate with the virtue by maintaining it.

catholicism.about.com/od/beliefsteachings/p/Faith.htm