How to prove that God does exist?

  • Thread starter Thread starter anhphan
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
But God the Father and God the Son are two different Persons, just as they are different from the Holy Spirit even though all Three are One in the Holy Trinity. We come to the Father through the Son, but knowing the Son does not necessarily mean we know the Father.
 
Paul tells us in Romans 1:20 For unseen things about him ( God ) have been made conspicuous, since the creation of the world, being understood by the things that were made ; likwise his everlasting virtue and divinity, so much so that they have no excuse.
So he is saying through creation we can know the work of God even if we can’t see him. So have faith, pray for him to make you strong.
Alot of people today need a physical God one you have to touch not faith in the invisible God.
 
But they are inseparable.

John 1
No one has ever seen God; the only Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he has made him known.

John 14
**Philip said to him, “Lord, show us the Father, and we shall be satisfied.” 9 Jesus said to him, “Have I been with you so long, and yet you do not know me, Philip? He who has seen me has seen the Father; how can you say, ‘Show us the Father’? 10 Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father in me? **
 
" I and my Father are one and the same. " said Jesus. Yes, I know they are two different beings. My point in my previous post. For the great love Jesus shows for the Father is radiated throughout the life of Jesus.and the Great love and mercy He shows us by words and actions. where would that come from,if not from the One who so Loved the World, He gave His only begotten Son . Have a Blessed and Healthy New Year.
 
My hand doesn’t look like that.
But I do see 3.1416
Does that qualify for the existence of God?
 
rcwitness said:
A wounded nature is also a sinful nature. I didnt say purely sinful.
Click to expand...
No it isn’t.
You are interpreting/understanding Ephesians in a Protestant manner that is not fully consistent with Catholic theology…at least not in the material meaning of the words you use.

This is because you mistakenly understand Ephesians here.
Eph 4:22 does not really speak of “human nature” in the way theologians use that phrase.
That is only your personal interpretation of “old self” or “old nature”.

A metaphysical nature cannot strictly be said to be sinful because true sin is the personal choice of a faculty of nature (the Will). That choice puts us into a “state of sin” and can also wound that “nature”. Hence human nature is “sinful” only in an analogical/metaphorical sense.

If you cannot see this then there is nothing more to say.
 
0104 said:
Well scripture says otherwise, that they are three coequal beings in one God head.
Click to expand...
I need to make a point here. God is one being, not three. God is three persons, not one. God is one being/nature who is three persons.

Might have been a slip up but we should be careful to never call God “three beings.” Posting this as a clarification for those who are reading who aren’t familiar with Trinitarianism.
 
Last edited:
We are “inclined to sin” as you say (concupiscence).

This is what i meant. In the context i used “sinful nature”, we are inclined NOT to believe, but to doubt.

You may be right that “sinful nature” is not the correct way to say concupiscence.
 
Last edited:
rcwitness said:
Everyone who has heard the Gospel of Christ is “learned” of it. Whether they accept it or not will determine their purity of heart.
Click to expand...
I would have to respectfully disagree with you that anyone who has head the Gospel is learned in it, whether the word “learned” is put in quotes or not. I know a man who can quote almost any passage in the Bible by memory and very much believes the story of Jesus curing the man born blind in John 9 is proof positive of reincarnation. This is a man who has gone to Bible study for many years. He says Jesus is speaking of reincarnation and the fact that we have to live many lives here on earth to “see.”

I don’t think the above interpretation is correct at all, and I doubt many here would. I don’t believe Christ ever spoke of reincarnation and said it was necessary or factual. Despite what others tell him, this man, who is NOT a member or visitor here, believes Christ is the Son of God, and he seems to love him and the Bible, which he reads daily. He seems to have a pure, but misguided, heart. Of course only God can judge the state of his heart. I am not judging him or any other person who believes in reincarnation. Some Buddhists I know who believe in reincarnation are very kind, very moral, very wonderful people. I’m only saying this Christian man has heard the Gospel of Christ many, many times, abd seems to learned in it, yet not learned, despite the seeming purity of his heart.

With all due respect, and my own need to keep learning,I think things are a bit more complicated than you stated.
 
Last edited:
Wesrock said:
I need to make a point here. God is one being, not three. God is three persons, not one. God is one being/nature who is three persons.
Click to expand...
I agree with you: Three Persons, one Being. All uncreated. God has never been three beings/natures, but always three Persons sharing one Nature, as you stated.
 
Last edited:
I didnt imply that someone who learns of the Gospel understands all of the Teachings of Jesus. Im sorry about your friend’s misguided conclusions. Growing in knowledge about Jesus is a process. Hearing the good news of the Gospel is usually not a process. As an adult, we hear and understand that Jesus of Nazareth was called the Son of God who was born of the Virgin, did not sin, was crucified and rose from the dead.

After the knowledge of this core Gospel, we have the grace of God calling us (and assisting our will) to turn to Him for forgiveness and life in His Spirit.

Then, the process of true growth in knowledge and grace can begin.

Now, i realize there can be various degrees of how well the Gospel is presented to individuals. Some might be very turned off by the message because of the messengers, if they are full of wicked behvior and corruption.

Im not trying to make everything simple. But there is simplicity in the Gospel too. It doesnt take high IQ’s to know God. We arent required to know the meaning of every doctrine to accept the Gospel. But we do need to accept the Gopel to know God’s Teachings (provided we have learned about the Gospel).
 
I agree with the above, but that wasn’t what I was addressing. I said I didn’t agree that everyone who heard the Gospel was “learned” of it whether one puts “learned” in quotes or not, and I stand by that assertion. IQ has nothing to do with it, nor does the simplicity or difficulty of the gospel. My assertion is that not everyone who has heard the gospel is learned in it, pure of heart or not.
 
Last edited:
BlackFriar said:
A metaphysical nature cannot strictly be said to be sinful because true sin is the personal choice of a faculty of nature (the Will). That choice puts us into a “state of sin” and can also wound that “nature”. Hence human nature is “sinful” only in an analogical/metaphorical sense.
Click to expand...
I totally agree with you, if I understand you correctly. I think humans were created by God (of course), and are naturally inclined to long for God. However, the wounding caused by Adam and Eve weakened man’s nature and he (and she) can be led astray and fall into sin, as you said, by personal choice, Sin is, I believe, always a personal choice.
 
FiveLinden said:
Has anyone ever met someone who listened to one of these philosophical ‘proofs’ and became a believer as a result?
Click to expand...
worked for me. Did far more to convince me of the existence of God than anything I read in scripture because scripture was suspect do to so many ‘interpretations’.
 
I have always been more interested in whether this unmoved mover actually cares.
That cannot be proven as far as I know.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top