If you had concrete evidence of God's existence

[Bradski]

Does it matter what the OP means by concrete evidence in the context of the question presented? The OP is just saying, for purposes of the question, evidence exists that would convince everyone who saw it–why is it so hard for everyone to just play along with that premise and answer what effect they think that might have?

I was a little surprised at the reticence being shown by the majority of posters. But then, I guess we are all afraid of being proven wrong.

Is it better to continue to believe what you think is correct rather than be told that you haven’t actually got it all right?

 

[CHRISTINE77]

What do you mean “IF”?

Amen!

 

[CHRISTINE77]

I was a little surprised at the reticence being shown by the majority of posters. But then, I guess we are all afraid of being proven wrong.

Is it better to continue to believe what you think is correct rather than be told that you haven’t actually got it all right?

You don’t believe in God. What do you mean “we”?

 

[CHRISTINE77]

Does it matter what the OP means by concrete evidence in the context of the question presented? The OP is just saying, for purposes of the question, evidence exists that would convince everyone who saw it–why is it so hard for everyone to just play along with that premise and answer what effect they think that might have?

The peace of Christ,
Mark

Why aren’t you playing along?

 

[CHRISTINE77]

So…to answer the OP’s question (which many don’t seem to be doing)…if you had this definitive proof that would convince everyone, would you share it or not?

Furthermore, what if it was proof of a God or religion that was different than the one you believed in? What if you had 100 percent proof of Muhammad flying up to heaven on a winged horse? (or whatever would prove Islam or another religion).

Would you share that?

.

The kingdom of God is spread all over this world. It’s so obvious you’d have to be a dumb deaf and blind not to see evidence of God. The heavens are telling the glory of God. Why are people so stupid is my question!!

 

[mikekle]

So…to answer the OP’s question (which many don’t seem to be doing)…if you had this definitive proof that would convince everyone, would you share it or not?

Furthermore, what if it was proof of a God or religion that was different than the one you believed in? What if you had 100 percent proof of Muhammad flying up to heaven on a winged horse? (or whatever would prove Islam or another religion).

Would you share that?

.

Yes, I would share it, but I have a feeling some would not believe me, but if you have absolute concrete proof he DOES exist, it probably wont matter to me that much if anyone else believes me or not. I mean, look at all the people who have claimed to see ufos, ghosts, etc the ones who truly see the real deal, usually say they do not care whether anyone else believes them or not, its because they KNOW firsthand and believe it

Jesus once said that even if a person was to return from the dead to warn their living relatives about the truth, they would not believe them, I think that is very true in our world today, if God himself descended into times square on new years eve surrounded by 100s of angels, how many people would actually believe it WAS God…probably not many, or they would try to claim it was ‘something else’.

 

[Peter_Plato]

I was a little surprised at the reticence being shown by the majority of posters. But then, I guess we are all afraid of being proven wrong.

Nah! It isn’t fear of being proven wrong, it is fear of being crucified.

When Jesus (Truth Himself) walked the earth, as part of the tightrope he was on he had to walk the narrow thread between keeping his identity hidden from some while, at the same time, revealing it to others. In other words, Jesus provided “concrete evidence” to those he knew could tolerate and welcome that evidence. No everyone can or will.

His words, miracles and actions would have been indisputable to those who witnessed them – those to whom he opted to reveal his identity – yet, he kept himself hidden from those he knew wouldn’t and couldn’t tolerate the Truth. When the truth of who he was eventually dawned upon those who had no time or tolerance for the Truth, they hung him on a cross.

The Truth may not be exactly what you think it is. I strongly suspect you will be the one who ends up in a state of silenced astonishment.

 

[MarkInOregon]

Why aren’t you playing along?

I believe I did in a subsequent post.

The peace of Christ,
Mark

 

[HerCrazierHalf]

Nah! It isn’t fear of being proven wrong, it is fear of being crucified.

Didn’t think of that possibility. There are still places where matters of faith are matters of state. Do you think this would be a concern from those following the wrong religion or would it also include those from the “wrong” Christian denominations?

 

[CHRISTINE77]

Nah! It isn’t fear of being proven wrong, it is fear of being crucified.

When Jesus (Truth Himself) walked the earth, as part of the tightrope he was on he had to walk the narrow thread between keeping his identity hidden from some while, at the same time, revealing it to others. In other words, Jesus provided “concrete evidence” to those he knew could tolerate and welcome that evidence. No everyone can or will.

His words, miracles and actions would have been indisputable to those who witnessed them – those to whom he opted to reveal his identity – yet, he kept himself hidden from those he knew wouldn’t and couldn’t tolerate the Truth. When the truth of who he was eventually dawned upon those who had no time or tolerance for the Truth, they hung him on a cross.

The Truth may not be exactly what you think it is. I strongly suspect you will be the one who ends up in a state of silenced astonishment.

I think so too.

 

[CHRISTINE77]

Yes, I would share it, but I have a feeling some would not believe me, but if you have absolute concrete proof he DOES exist, it probably wont matter to me that much if anyone else believes me or not. I mean, look at all the people who have claimed to see ufos, ghosts, etc the ones who truly see the real deal, usually say they do not care whether anyone else believes them or not, its because they KNOW firsthand and believe it

Jesus once said that even if a person was to return from the dead to warn their living relatives about the truth, they would not believe them, I think that is very true in our world today, if God himself descended into times square on new years eve surrounded by 100s of angels, how many people would actually believe it WAS God…probably not many, or they would try to claim it was ‘something else’.

Very true.

 

[TheCuriousCat]

your definition of faith is not the definition of faith. The very reason that Catholics have faith is because we have evidence. the reason I have my faith s because I am a reasonable creature. I am sure that my friends and family would beg to differ on that. That’s not the point, you’re making a baseless assertion

Wow, this leaves me gobsmacked.

If I had a dollar for every time a Catholic has told me that God won’t provide me evidence of his existence because he requires faith I could retire. However, when you say a Catholic believes without evidence, they do a 180. Which is it? Do you need to believe without evidence, or do you believe based on evidence? If it is based on evidence, would you stop believing if that evidence was shown to be false?

As to the OP, in the face of overwhelming evidence of a deity, I would start believing, and I would tell people the reason I changed my mind.

 

[CHRISTINE77]

So…you 'aint gonna answer her question still?

Yeah, but…in her question, she said the evidence would **surely make everyone believe you. **
So…thanks for answering her!
I’m curious what everyone is going to say, but…not many are answering.

.

It’s a dumb question. You need to use eyes of faith to see God. Cynical unbelieving eyes will see nothing but the material world, and usually in a bad way.

 

[Wesrock]

Wow, this leaves me gobsmacked.

If I had a dollar for every time a Catholic has told me that God won’t provide me evidence of his existence because he requires faith I could retire. However, when you say a Catholic believes without evidence, they do a 180. Which is it? Do you need to believe without evidence, or do you believe based on evidence? If it is based on evidence, would you stop believing if that evidence was shown to be false?

As to the OP, in the face of overwhelming evidence of a deity, I would start believing, and I would tell people the reason I changed my mind.

Well, they are probably meaning empirical, scientific, falsifiable evidence on the one hand, and rational reasoning in the other.

 

[CHRISTINE77]

No one said anything about cynical, unbelieving eyes.
In fact, the OP stressed the opposite-- that ALL the people shown the evidence would find it “easily and quickly understood” and it would “convince 100% of those view it.”

I’m going to assume then, from the answers you’ve given so far, that…if God presented you with the kind of concrete evidence about his existence that would prove him to everyone else in the world–thereby giving everybody a chance to save their souls and get to heaven…you would *not *share this information?

You would not, as it were, spread the gospel/good news?

.

Read the Bible, read some books where people have already struggled with this question, such as C.S. Lewis, Dante, Milton, examine beautiful religious art, look around you at unspoiled nature. Or come as a little child to the beautiful Jesus.

I can’t answer that question in a short post. It takes a lot of exploration, soul searching, opening yourself the possibility of God.

People today are so lazy. They want to see a video, take a pill, read a blog, to get an easy explanation to huge questions. It’s not that simple, but with some effort everyone can find God.

 

[mikekle]

No one said anything about cynical, unbelieving eyes.
In fact, the OP stressed the opposite-- that ALL the people shown the evidence would find it “easily and quickly understood” and it would “convince 100% of those view it.”

I’m going to assume then, from the answers you’ve given so far, that…if God presented you with the kind of concrete evidence about his existence that would prove him to everyone else in the world–thereby giving everybody a chance to save their souls and get to heaven…you would *not *share this information?

You would not, as it were, spread the gospel/good news?

.

The thing is though, if anyone ever had such convincing evidence, no one would need faith anymore.

 

[Peter_Plato]

The thing is though, if anyone ever had such convincing evidence, no one would need faith anymore.

I disagree. Knowing for certain that God exists and trusting in him are two very different things; in particular, when the realities and vagaries of existence, suffering and death loom before you and stare you directly in the eyes.

You may know with 98% or even very close to 100% certainty that the major surgery you will be undergoing in a few hours is survivable, but for any one individual to have sufficient trust in the surgeon and hospital to undergo the procedure requires something more than knowledge.

I suspect there is a very good reason why faith – and not knowledge – is the required virtue regarding our salvation; and that reason is an existential one rather than an intellectual one. Our existence at its core is more than mere intellect.

Possessing certain knowledge ABOUT God is quite a different matter from knowing or apprehending God directly, or trusting and loving him.

Objective knowledge ABOUT someone (even when 100% certain) is not the same as knowing them intimately. Trust or faith is a necessary condition for moving past mediated knowledge (knowledge about) and moving into direct personal communion.

I would argue that God, too, has his standards, so knowing God intimately is not solely about our taking the initiative, even when we know with 100% objective certainty that God exists. The crucial piece is God revealing himself to us directly and for that God does the preparation. It is not something we alone can accomplish.

Again, we may know with absolute certainly that God exists, but still not know God.

AND we cannot know with absolute certainty that God exists unless we know God directly and personally. Otherwise, we really have no idea what we are talking about when we say “God exists.” Ergo, certain knowledge of God cannot completely depend upon any proof, but upon God revealing himself directly to us.

We cannot truly know THAT God is without knowing WHO God is. This is why faith is a supernatural virtue and not mere belief in the absence of physical evidence or even when that belief is fully flushed with physical evidence.

Matthew 16:15-19 Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition (RSVCE)

He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” Simon Peter replied, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” And Jesus answered him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you [not even Simon Peter’s own neurological system and brain], but my Father who is in heaven. And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

 

[sonofbarry]

Faith is believing without seeing. That was the substance of Jesus’ words to Thomas.
If we could see (i.e. clear, direct evidence, such as a second coming), there would be no need for faith.

You’d still have belief, but it would be absolute, proven belief in this case. Kinda like believing in the ocean. You can’t avoid it; it’s there.

 

[mikekle]

I disagree. Knowing for certain that God exists and trusting in him are two very different things; in particular, when the realities and vagaries of existence, suffering and death loom before you and stare you directly in the eyes.

You may know with 98% or even very close to 100% certainty that the major surgery you will be undergoing in a few hours is survivable, but for any one individual to have sufficient trust in the surgeon and hospital to undergo the procedure requires something more than knowledge.

I suspect there is a very good reason why faith – and not knowledge – is the required virtue regarding our salvation; and that reason is an existential one rather than an intellectual one. Our existence at its core is more than mere intellect.

Possessing certain knowledge ABOUT God is quite a different matter from knowing or apprehending God directly, or trusting and loving him.

Objective knowledge ABOUT someone (even when 100% certain) is not the same as knowing them intimately. Trust or faith is a necessary condition for moving past mediated knowledge (knowledge about) and moving into direct personal communion.

I would argue that God, too, has his standards, so knowing God intimately is not solely about our taking the initiative, even when we know with 100% objective certainty that God exists. The crucial piece is God revealing himself to us directly and for that God does the preparation. It is not something we alone can accomplish.

Again, we may know with absolute certainly that God exists, but still not know God.

AND we cannot know with absolute certainty that God exists unless we know God directly and personally. Otherwise, we really have no idea what we are talking about when we say “God exists.” Ergo, certain knowledge of God cannot completely depend upon any proof, but upon God revealing himself directly to us.

We cannot truly know THAT God is without knowing WHO God is. This is why faith is a supernatural virtue and not mere belief in the absence of physical evidence or even when that belief is fully flushed with physical evidence.

Thats where it gets tricky, some verses seem to indicate believing God is who he claims to be and what he has done for us, is enough for salvation.

 

[Aloysium]

Thats where it gets tricky, some verses seem to indicate believing God is who he claims to be and what he has done for us, is enough for salvation.

As mentioned above, knowing that God exists implies knowing who He is. God is Love. Through a giving of ourselves, through acts of love, we become more Christ-like. Who knows the Son knows the Father. Faith and action are one. Hypocrites pay lip service to the truth; they lack faith. The path becomes clearer as we tread along. I suppose that first step may be the most difficult; it really goes against our grain.