How certain are we that God exists?

[KingCoil]

Please read the correction in this line from my post earlier in #304 (line in bold enlarged font):

May 9, '14, 3:11 pm

#304​

Re: How certain are we that God exists?

Welcome to this thread, please read post 1 and post 101, for a proper orientation to the thread. Thanks. See below for the reproduction of posts 1 and 101. ]

================================

Originally Posted by opusAquinas
What establishes that a fact is true?

KingCoil

ANNEX

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost…&postcount=101

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=11889096&postcount=1
Part 1


forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost…&postcount=101
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=11889096&postcount=1
Part 2

Apr 19, '14, 3:41 pm #101
​

Well. let’s go back to the topic of this thread.

Here are the snapshots of my division of human certainty and my argument for the inferential certainty of God’s existence.

Part 1 division of human certainty
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=11893837&postcount=25

Part 2 argument for God
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=11900782&postcount=55

[/QUOTE]

 

[KingCoil]

Dear readers and posters here, if you have a point you want me to take up with you, for example from OpusA he wants to talk about true, truth with me, and from Jochoa he wants to talk living God creator cause with me, and our good friend, Sapien, I really don’t know what he is up to: because when I ask him to say again with new words what he had intended to say earlier, he will insist that I look up his earlier words, finally he informed me that he was leaving this thread, so again to Sapien, on record please [again] don’t leave me, but if you have a point you want to take up with me which I don’t think relevant here, like for example the ideas of Damaso (whoever), and this to all, please introduce a new thread on your points and inform me to go there.

This thread is about “How certain are we that God exists?”

That is why namely owing to the topic is about man’s certainty in re God existing, I write all about certainty from my modesty aside own intelligent thinking grounded on logic and facts.

KingCoil

 

[KingCoil]

There has been mention from posters here of absolute certainty of God existing.

I have expounded that there cannot be absolute certainty of God existing, i.e., from the part of man, because man is not an absolute being, God alone is the only unique one of His own kind the absolute being: wherefore outside God it is impossible for a non-absolute being to possess anything at all in an absolute manner.

Allow me to reproduce here my recent division of human certainty:

Okay, I will now resume my exposition of what is inferential certainty; but first allow me to give readers here the division of direct human certainty, and also where in the division is inferential human certainty.

HUMAN CERTAINTY

• A. Direct certainty founded on immediate experience of a fact
• 1. On the existence of a fact outside the self of a human
• 1. On the existence of a fact inside the self of a human
• (a) That is common for every human, e.g., the fact of a stomach inside a human
• (b) That is in a group of humans or only in one particular human
• • Example of a group of humans, consider humans who have photographic memory,
• [ii] Example of one particular human, consider Einstein, author of theory of relativity
• B. Inferential certainty – founded on intelligent thinking grounded on logic and facts

…]
Man cannot have absolute certainty of God existing, and not direct experience of God existing giving rise to direct certainty, but only inferential certainty, namely by intelligent thinking on logic and facts from his experience of everything he has access to, in order to arrive by way of implications (that is what inference is all about) in the things he knows about, to the existence of their creator cause as author of the universe or of everything with a beginning.

Addressing posters who are into the absolute certainty by man of God’s existing, perhaps you care to explain what you mean by absolute certainty, starting first with the term absolute, then we can work together to concur on what is absolute certainty, and determine together whether man can possess absolute certainty or not, on God existing as creator of the universe.

KingCoil

 

[ThinkingSapien]

our good friend, Sapien, I really don’t know what he is up to: because when I ask him to say again with new words what he had intended to say earlier, he will insist that I look up his earlier words,

This is inaccurate. I referred you to a message with an alternative explanation and you communicated back in your response that you didn’t want to go back to look at it.

finally he informed me that he was leaving this thread, so again to Sapien, on record please [again] don’t leave me, but if you have a point you want to take up with me which I don’t think relevant here, like for example the ideas of Damaso (whoever), and this to all, please introduce a new thread on your points and inform me to go there.

At this point I will be just playing the role of an observer. You made it clear that you don’t want to deal with my way of communication and I think that is a point on which we have mutual agreement. It seems that our manners of communication are incompatible; there are conflicts in styles and vocabularies. To speak with honestly I also am not fond of the types of responses that you provide to people that disagree with you. You’ve not been able to accept my replies when they don’t conform to the answers of certain false dichotomies.

I’m still interacting in the forums. But the conversations in which I engage are going at a pace that I find pleasing with others that have similar enough vocabularies and compatible conceptions in certain topics that allow for easy communication of the ideas that we wish to exchange. The once-per-day exchange in this thread is too slow for me.

If you wish to respond do so. I’ll read it, though I might not respond.

 

[oldcelt]

To answer the OP in the simplest possible terms…our certainty about the existence of a Divine Being must, by the nature of the question and the existing tangible evidence must be low.

 

[KingCoil]

This is inaccurate. I referred you to a message with an alternative explanation and you communicated back in your response that you didn’t want to go back to look at it.

At this point I will be just playing the role of an observer. You made it clear that you don’t want to deal with my way of communication and I think that is a point on which we have mutual agreement. It seems that our manners of communication are incompatible; there are conflicts in styles and vocabularies. To speak with honestly I also am not fond of the types of responses that you provide to people that disagree with you. You’ve not been able to accept my replies when they don’t conform to the answers of certain false dichotomies.

I’m still interacting in the forums. But the conversations in which I engage are going at a pace that I find pleasing with others that have similar enough vocabularies and compatible conceptions in certain topics that allow for easy communication of the ideas that we wish to exchange. The once-per-day exchange in this thread is too slow for me.

If you wish to respond do so. I’ll read it, though I might not respond.

Okay, Sapien, let us talk now about absolute certainty of God existing, certainty that is with man knowing.

KingCoil

 

[KingCoil]

To answer the OP in the simplest possible terms…our certainty about the existence of a Divine Being must, by the nature of the question and the existing tangible evidence must be low.

---

With malice toward none; with charity for all; with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in; to bind up the nation’s wounds; to care for him who shall have borne the battle, and for his widow, and his orphan…
Abraham Lincoln

I concur.

Now, let us work together to come to concur on what is absolute certainty, starting with the term absolute.

KingCoil

 

[KingCoil]

Here, I will start the ball rolling.

Allow me to cite a standard online dictionary on what is absolute:

Absolute part 1
http://i58.tinypic.com/28cned1.jpg
dictionary.reference.com/browse/absolute?s=b

Absolute part 2
http://i61.tinypic.com/23i9onr.jpg
dictionary.reference.com/browse/absolute?s=b

So, in brief absolute means the quality of an entity or a thing (at this point Jochoa will chip in with his insistence that the entity must be a living one, okay, no problem with me) that has all the features possible in an existing entity or thing, in another word, absolute means perfect, or complete, or without any other feature to desire for, and that is because any other feature to desire for in existence is not possible.

An example of an absolute being is God in the Christian faith, and also in the Islamic faith, and also in the Judaic faith.

Now, let us talk about what then is absolute certainty.

Certainty is the quality by which with humans he is sure, i.e. in his knowledge, that he has the information of something in objective reality that corresponds to that something that exists in objective reality, and he can point to it if that something can be accessed by man’s external senses and his consciousness, like for example, the nose in the face of every human; and also if that something cannot be accessed by man’s external senses and his consciousness, then it can still be accessed by his reasoning with intelligent thinking on logic and facts, for example God as the creator cause of the universe and that He is the perfect, complete being, without any more feature to desire for in existence, namely, that God is an absolute being, man also has certainty of.

Now it is my contention that man has direct certainty of everything his external senses and his consciousness has access to, but with God man has only inferential certainty.

Some posters here insist that man has absolute certainty of God’s existence.

But I am asking them, how can man have absolute certainty of God existing when he man is not an absolute being: only an absolute being has absolute certainty of God existing, meaning, only God knows absolutely certainly that He exists and He exists as an absolute, perfect, complete being, with nothing else to desire for in existence, because no other feature desirable is possible for God.

I would propose that posters who insist that they have absolute certainty of God existing, that they also produce their division of human certainty.

Here again, and forgive me for repeating, my division of human certainty:

Okay, I will now resume my exposition of what is inferential certainty; but first allow me to give readers here the division of direct human certainty, and also where in the division is inferential human certainty.

HUMAN CERTAINTY

• A. Direct certainty founded on immediate experience of a fact
• 1. On the existence of a fact outside the self of a human
• 1. On the existence of a fact inside the self of a human
• (a) That is common for every human, e.g., the fact of a stomach inside a human
• (b) That is in a group of humans or only in one particular human
• • Example of a group of humans, consider humans who have photographic memory,
• [ii] Example of one particular human, consider Einstein, author of theory of relativity
• B. Inferential certainty – founded on intelligent thinking grounded on logic and facts

…]
Cheers,

KingCoil

 

[Linusthe2nd]

Here, I will start the ball rolling.

Allow me to cite a standard online dictionary on what is absolute:

So, in brief absolute means…( cut for length ) … Cheers,KingCoil

But we are not obliged to accept your definitions, or even those of the dictionary or of those of any science or textbook.

We are absolutely certain God exists because of his Divine Revolution. For the same reason we are absolutely certain the Catholic Church is the Church established by Christ. We are also certain that man can through reason ( either through philosophical reasoning, or common sense reasoning from the observation of the world, the voice of conscience, the existence of his soul, etc. ) arrive at the existence of God, the first principle and last end of all things. ( De Fide ). And since God does not lie, we are absolutely certain of these things.

Linus2nd

 

[KingCoil]

Of course we don’t have to adopt the definitions in the dictionaries because dictionaries are made by man and we can have a lot of definitions not known to the men who put up dictionaries.

However, whatever definitions we agree to use, it must not be altogether completely alien and even contrary to the standard meaning of the word as can be made out by any literate and experienced users of words.

For example, atheists are very arbitrary to use the word nothing to mean something, that is certainly not honesty in the use of words, and I know one who writes a whole book supposedly very learned and ‘scientific’ where he keeps saying that nothing is not nothing but something only we did not know in the past then that there was something.

Well, to be honest, they should just tell readers that there was always something even though in earlier times man thought there was nothing.

Now, about you statements to the effect that you have absolute certainty that God exists, and that is from divine revelation; may I just invite you to examine whether divine revelation the fact is a piece of information that you are absolutely certain to have taken place?

But forgive me, absolute means (and I have said this already several times) not in reference to anything at all, not in relation to anything by which the thing being absolute is measured by or compared to.

That is why man cannot have absolute certainty of God existing but only inferential certainty, that is in reference to his human way of knowing something as to be inferentially certain or sure that it exists outside his mind in concepts.

So, will you agree with me that you make divine revelation the criterion for absolute certainty, when divine revelation is relative to each man and each religious group, how they understand the quality and the quantity of divine revelation they possess.

And you know, there is more divine revelation in the Catholic church than in the Protestant churches.

So, how can you say that you have absolute certainty of God existing owing to your possession of divine revelation, whereas others also say perhaps the same thing that they have absolute certainty of God existing on divine revelation, but the quality and quantity of divine revelation with them is lesser on both counts of quality and quantity than with the Catholic faith.

KingCoil

 

[KingCoil]

But Linus2, perhaps you care to present your division of human certainty?

So, you could start with the big division into absolute and relative?

By the way, forgive me, but the Catholic Church has more divine revelation that the Protestant churches, because the Catholic Church has written divine revelation and oral divine revelation, the latter is called tradition.

And the Catholic Church has a better in a way quality of divine revelation than with the Protestant churches. because the Catholic church has the Pope and the ecumenical council to ascertify to Catholics what doctrines and what disciplines are genuinely from divine revelation, by their infallible pronouncements and declarations of the doctrines and disciplines which are promulgated as to be infallible doctrines and disciplines divinely revealed by God.

That makes all Catholic doubly absolutely certain on the teaching by the Catholic church that God exists, and I add and the existence of God as creator of the universe is known to man even by just reason alone, i.e., intelligent thinking grounded on logic and facts.

Cheers,

KingCoil

 

[Linusthe2nd]

But Linus2, perhaps you care to present your division of human certainty?

So, you could start with the big division into absolute and relative?

By the way, forgive me, but the Catholic Church has more divine revelation that the Protestant churches, because the Catholic Church has written divine revelation and oral divine revelation, the latter is called tradition.

And the Catholic Church has a better in a way quality of divine revelation than with the Protestant churches. because the Catholic church has the Pope and the ecumenical council to ascertify to Catholics what doctrines and what disciplines are genuinely from divine revelation, by their infallible pronouncements and declarations of the doctrines and disciplines which are promulgated as to be infallible doctrines and disciplines divinely revealed by God.

That makes all Catholic doubly absolutely certain on the teaching by the Catholic church that God exists, and I add and the existence of God as creator of the universe is known to man even by just reason alone, i.e., intelligent thinking grounded on logic and facts.

Cheers,

KingCoil

No, I have formal reasons to judge the degrees of certainty. And I’m not particularly interested beyond what I have already expressed.

With the sentiments you just expressed, why did you leave the Church? You do know you are in a very dangerous place?

Linus2nd

 

[Linusthe2nd]

Of course we don’t have to adopt the definitions in the dictionaries because dictionaries are made by man and we can have a lot of definitions not known to the men who put up dictionaries.

However, whatever definitions we agree to use, it must not be altogether completely alien and even contrary to the standard meaning of the word as can be made out by any literate and experienced users of words.

For example, atheists are very arbitrary to use the word nothing to mean something, that is certainly not honesty in the use of words, and I know one who writes a whole book supposedly very learned and ‘scientific’ where he keeps saying that nothing is not nothing but something only we did not know in the past then that there was something.

Well, to be honest, they should just tell readers that there was always something even though in earlier times man thought there was nothing.

Now, about you statements to the effect that you have absolute certainty that God exists, and that is from divine revelation; may I just invite you to examine whether divine revelation the fact is a piece of information that you are absolutely certain to have taken place?

But forgive me, absolute means (and I have said this already several times) not in reference to anything at all, not in relation to anything by which the thing being absolute is measured by or compared to.

That is why man cannot have absolute certainty of God existing but only inferential certainty, that is in reference to his human way of knowing something as to be inferentially certain or sure that it exists outside his mind in concepts.

So, will you agree with me that you make divine revelation the criterion for absolute certainty, when divine revelation is relative to each man and each religious group, how they understand the quality and the quantity of divine revelation they possess.

And you know, there is more divine revelation in the Catholic church than in the Protestant churches.

So, how can you say that you have absolute certainty of God existing owing to your possession of divine revelation, whereas others also say perhaps the same thing that they have absolute certainty of God existing on divine revelation, but the quality and quantity of divine revelation with them is lesser on both counts of quality and quantity than with the Catholic faith.

KingCoil

I think you think too much. This statement is directly contradictory to the one you posted after. Inferential reasoning as it relates to the existence of God is certain enough that we are obliged to search further. Aristotle even said his God should be worshiped. So we do indeed come to a certain knowledge of God’s existence and that he is the first principle and last end of everything. That statement is absolutely true, for me, for every man, every woman, because its truth value is guaranteed by God, through his Church.

I make no apologies. I would advise you to give up this path you are on and get back to Church.

Linus2nd

 

[ynotzap]

I am absolutely certain that I am totally dependent on God for everything
I didn’t create myself
I did not bring myself into existence
I am a sinner
I am fallible
I am ignorant of many, many things
With out God interfering, I will die a physical death
that I know truth
that I am not Omniscience
that I am finite
that I can go on and on
As certain as I am, I know that I am not God, but I am absolutely certain I know Him as much as He reveals to me.
So the question arises " How can I know with absolute certainty. Only God is the Absolute?
If am consistent with the truth, I am consistent with the Absolute, and I share in His absoluteness but remain finite, not divine. Jesus says " I am the truth, the way, and the light" I am absolutely certain of all the above

 

[oldcelt]

I think you think too much. This statement is directly contradictory to the one you posted after. Inferential reasoning as it relates to the existence of God is certain enough that we are obliged to search further. Aristotle even said his God should be worshiped. So we do indeed come to a certain knowledge of God’s existence and that he is the first principle and last end of everything. That statement is absolutely true, for me, for every man, every woman, because its truth value is guaranteed by God, through his Church.

I make no apologies. I would advise you to give up this path you are on and get back to Church.

Linus2nd

Sorry Linus…your guarantee of your belief does not make something true for everyone. Did Aristotle say that everyone should worship his god? We may come to a faithful belief in God, but it is far from certain knowledge. The variance of beliefs, even among similar systems, is proof of that

 

[KingCoil]

I observe that posters here who say that they have absolute certainty of God existing, they don’t care to give what they understand by absolute certainty, starting with the word absolute.

Suppose you all who use the word absolute as though it is as common as peanut, do genuine intelligent thinking grounded on logic and facts, examine what is your undersstanding of absolute, the adjective, and also the noun routinely prefixed with the, as in the absolute.

And next, think carefully and produce your division of human certainty, starting with distinguishing between absolute human certainty and relative human certainty, or whatever is different to absolute human certainty as another class of human certainty.

Here, and forgive me, is what I understand by human certainty.

Part 1

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=11985604&postcount=317

Yesterday, 11:33 am #317​

Part 2

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=11985604&postcount=317

Yesterday, 11:33 am #317​

Part 3

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=11985604&postcount=317

Yesterday, 11:33 am #317​

So, dear posters here who are into absolute certainty with your existence of God, please give your concept of absolute, absolute certainty, and the division of human certainty.

It is easy to use crucial words, but you must also be ready to give what you understand by them.

Dear readers, please notice that I don’t say that I have already stated this or that or everything earlier, and you just have to look them up; I always with important statements from me, always bring them forth again faithfully and completely.

Cheers,

KingCoil

 

[Jim_Baur]

I have often wondered how many steps or developments had to occur in order for a human life to exist.

From the Sun and plants (how where they formed?), to DNA, to the two sexes, to all of the steps for each body to prepare to conceive a child, to food and the trillions of cells in our bodies.

As the ancient Greek scientists/philosophers could easily discern, a logos exists.

Whether or not the logos revealed or reveals Its being to us, is a matter of faith.

Then we call Him God, if He actually did.

But some might powerful being thought all of this into existence–one way or another.

 

[KingCoil]

Dear Linus2 and everyone else who are concerned with my spiritual stead, thank you so much for your thoughtfulness.

I know God creator of the universe and of anything at all with a beginning in the totality of existence, to exist not only as a concept in my mind but most importantly as an objective fact in the totality of existence independent of my mind.

I have God all the time in my mind and talk to Him all the time.

Now, God knows that and I tell Him all the time, I have adopted the DIY ideal of relating to God in the choice of a religion or faith.

I now attend Sunday service in an Evangelical church, but in recent months I don’t attend Sunday service there anymore, wherefore no more service for me on Sundays.

What I do now is to attend the Friday evening fellowship of brethren and sisters starting at 8:00 p.m.

But as the commuting van picking up folks make the trip to my place comes very early at around 4:30 p.m. in making its round, I arrive at the church usually too early.

However, no trouble there, I just also join the weekly prayer meeting which starts at 6:30 p.m.; and here is the welcome part, afterwards there is dinner served so that folks attending the 8:00 p.m. fellowship will not have to bear the inconvenience of an empty stomach.

They ask me why I don’t attend Sunday service anymore, and I tell them it is because I already have two sessions with God and fellow Christians every Friday evening faithfully: so that should be enough, besides everyday with me is a Sunday with God.

If they insist on telling me not to miss Sunday service, I will say to them, the Sunday service is no different from the Friday prayer meeting and the fellowship coming after that, and it the Sunday service is no different from the prayer meeting and the fellowship event after the prayer meeting.

You see, with Protestant churches which are into some fundamentalist tendency, they don’t see the Sunday worship service to be into anything like the sacrifice of the Mass in Catholic churches: it is also singing, praying, and listening to a sermon, just like the Friday prayer meeting and the fellowship after that, but of course on first Sundays, there is the communion service, which is for them purely commemorative and nothing of eating the body and blood of Jesus.

Forgive me for talking about my spiritual religious church life.

Yes, that is an example of DIY relationship with God, creator of the universe – and Jochoa will chip in again, the living God, creator cause of the universe – and of course of everything in the totality of existence that has a beginning.

Okay, do not forget to present your concepts of absolute, absolute certainty, and your division of human certainty.

KingCoil

 

[KingCoil]

I have often wondered how many steps or developments had to occur in order for a human life to exist.

From the Sun and plants (how where they formed?), to DNA, to the two sexes, to all of the steps for each body to prepare to conceive a child, to food and the trillions of cells in our bodies.

As the ancient Greek scientists/philosophers could easily discern, a logos exists.

Whether or not the logos revealed or reveals Its being to us, is a matter of faith.

Then we call Him God, if He actually did.

But some might powerful being thought all of this into existence–one way or another.

The way I understand you, and put into my own words, you see that there is a designer craftsman creator cause of everything that has a beginning.

He brought about everything with a beginning, the universe and anything else which we cannot access with our senses, consciousness, and by reasoning from logic and facts, which act of thinking is His way of bringing to existence anything and everything that is not Himself.

I concur with you on that.

How certain are we that He created everything?

As sure as we can reason intelligently from logic and facts to His existence and act of creation, and that sure-ness I call inferential certainty.

And I want to get the opinions of posters here, what kind of certainty they have of God existing.

Many here voice out that their certainty is absolute.

I take exception to that; and if they do work on their concepts of what is certainty, what is absolute, what is their division of human certainty, they will also come to the conclusion that absolute certainty is not possible with man, what is possible with man is what I call inferential thinking, and it is necessary and moreover sufficient in order to fulfill our due to God as our creator.

So, from my part, it is not possible for us to come to absolute certainty of God existing, but it is possible and actual for man to come to inferential certainty, that is necessary from our part, namely, to acknowledge on inferential certainty God to be the creator of the universe and everything whatever else with a beginning, and that kind of certainty is sufficient to meet the demand of God as creator of the universe, etc., His demand or at least expectation that we be sure that He exists and is the creator of the universe, etc.

KingCoil

 

[jochoa]

So, dear posters here who are into absolute certainty with your existence of God, please give your concept of absolute, absolute certainty, and the division of human certainty.

Absolute
adj.

• viewed or existing independently and not in relation to other things; not relative or comparative.

noun

• a value or principle that is regarded as universally valid or that may be viewed without relation to other things.

Certain

• A. Direct certainty is founded on absolute beings
• 1. Known for sure; Known by God; ex. God is the Holy Trinity
• 1. Knowledge of God known by a human; ex. God is the Holy Trinity
• B. Inferential certainty is founded on temporal beings, without consideration of God.
• 1. A firm belief directly proportional to the perceived alignment of an object in question and reasonable analysis of one’s environment. ex. One who believes God does or does not exist.

Thank you very much for the very interesting and challenging discussion! I look forward to learning more from you!