Philosophical Proofs For the Existence of God

[warpspeedpetey]

So then we are supposed to live according to the ten commandments but God doesn’t need to? I thought God set the standard, no?

yup.

did your parents make you go to bed as a child, but then go to bed too, or did they stay up later?

i assume like most people they stayed up later, why? because they knew what was good for you, even when you didn’t

did they let you drive by yourself as a toddler? no

why, you werent not able to act as an adult, you were not capable

we are not able to act as G-d, we dont know how, and arent strong enough

 

[Namesake]

yup.

did your parents make you go to bed as a child, but then go to bed too, or did they stay up later?

i assume like most people they stayed up later, why? because they knew what was good for you, even when you didn’t

did they let you drive by yourself as a toddler? no

why, you werent not able to act as an adult, you were not capable

we are not able to act as G-d, we dont know how, and arent strong enough

I don’t remember comments about bed time but I do remember the idea about killing babies. Isn’t that just a little different?

It’s OK for God to kill babies, right?

 

[warpspeedpetey]

I don’t remember comments about bed time but I do remember the idea about killing babies. Isn’t that just a little different?

It’s OK for God to kill babies, right?

the point of the analogy was that you didn’t know what your parents knew, you couldn’t do what your parents could do, and therefore you were expected to follow a different set of rules than your parents.

im pointing out the the general nature of the human/G-d relationship.

and yes, as the creator and owner of everything, including all people, it is just fine for G-d to kill babies, grandmas, cousins, senators, servants, and taxicab drivers. anyone atall.

just as you can dispose of your property in any way you wish, so can G-d

 

[Oreoracle]

and yes, as the creator and owner of everything, including all people, it is just fine for G-d to kill babies, grandmas, cousins, senators, servants, and taxicab drivers. anyone atall.

just as you can dispose of your property in any way you wish, so can G-d

So it is also acceptable for him to make them writhe in agony instead of taking their lives peacefully?

That’s sick. I don’t know how else to say it. :nope:

P. S. If that sort of god is captain, I declare mutiny.

 

[warpspeedpetey]

So it is also acceptable for him to make them writhe in agony instead of taking their lives peacefully?

yes it is, who knows His reasons

That’s sick. I don’t know how else to say it. :nope:

 

[Oreoracle]

yes it is, who knows His reasons

So let’s get this straight: you’re saying that I’m in no position to oppose him, because I don’t know what he knows. However, this works both ways. You shouldn’t be in any position to support him, because you don’t know what he knows either.

Also, how do you know that he knows more than you? It always amazed me how people believe that you can use inferior knowledge to recognize superior knowledge.

if G-d is killing the mutinous sailors, as he has been known to do, that may not be the wisest course if you wish to stay alive.

I’d rather be dead through principle than alive through cowardice.

 

[warpspeedpetey]

So let’s get this straight: you’re saying that I’m in no position to oppose him, because I don’t know what he knows. However, this works both ways. You shouldn’t be in any position to support him, because you don’t know what he knows either.

thats right you cant oppose him because you dont know what he knows.

but why should it work both ways?

even if it did, that would say something about me not Him.

so im ok whether your right or not, on that issue. because you wont be deciding my fate at the end of my life He will.

Also, how do you know that he knows more than you? It always amazed me how people believe that you can use inferior knowledge to recognize superior knowledge.

as i neither possess the knowledge or the ability to form a universe, i think its safe to say that He knows more than me.

I’d rather be dead through principle than alive through cowardice.

as i assume that you neither know nor possess the capability to do that yourself, how do you propose that you should be the moral authority?

 

[JDaniel]

I don’t remember comments about bed time but I do remember the idea about killing babies. Isn’t that just a little different?

It’s OK for God to kill babies, right?

Namesake:

Those were primitive times. People did barbaric things to each other. That was how they handled inter-tribal warfare. It was the way it was. But, one must remember that the position of human beings, perhaps more so in those days, was just an inch away from the step back into the metaphysical realm. Whether a person remained alive on earth, or alive in Heaven or Hell was (and is) irrelevant to God, in a sense. Obviously, those who got into Heaven were better off than those who went somewhat south of Heaven.

Moreover, one must remember that Abraham and the children of Israel were given a promise directly by God. They were the ones He “chose”. God swore a promise to protect them and help them survive. Anyone who dared to accost God’s chosen people would suffer the consequences. Many of those that did were quite wicked. Others were just plain nasty. Many believed they were better than God’s chosen people and that their gods were better and mightier than the God of Abraham. How else would you get the Truth to primitive people in primitive times and still keep to the plan.

As for killing babies, I guess you have to decide where those babies would be better off, from an anthropic perspective. If they live to the age where they are able to choose against God, they will most likely be sent to Hell. OTOH, if they die while very young, invincible ignorance places them with God in Heaven. This reminds me of an old definition of flying: it’s “hours of shear pleasure surrounded on either side by moments of shear terror.” The hours of pleasure from level flight way more than made up for the landing and the take off.

Warpspeed is right. When we think about those kinds of events, we tend towards the anthropic. How would “I” feel. How would “I” handle it. How would “I” regard it and so forth. We also tend to second guess God. “Why didn’t He do this, or, that?” “Why didn’t He just instill the knowledge of Him in them?” There’s a lot more there than meets the eye. Tough as that sounds, it’s true.

jd

 

[Bruno_Schulz]

**

That’s explicitly contrary to the teaching of the Church

“Our holy mother, the Church, holds and teaches that God, the first principle and last end of all things, can be known with certainty from the created world by the natural light of human reason.”

Of course that is so, but to philosophise about whatever man is philosophising about, is making own thoughts about whatsoever subject – be it religions, ways of life, thoughts of nonhuman creations or whatever.

Christianity does not allow “Philosophical Proofs For the Existence of God”, for Jesus Christ revealed God to the extend we can conceive the extremely huge „subject“. And proof can’t be, for it takes believe to be Child of God.
Moreover … Jesus founded His Church, that holds and teaches Jesus word.

So; how on earth could philosophical ways of thinking, bring about more perception – or even “proof for the existence of God” ?!
Believe and faith brings proof to the individual - not to all. Philosophy can’t do that (philosophy anyway always had been a first step in science of any subject). Athests call Theology a form of Philosophy - it’s not.

Atheists think, that “all this religious stuff of Christianity” is nothing but philosophical search to the question “is there a God?”.
The Church, we Catholics do not need any Philosophical Proofs For the Existence of God, as we have the very clear word of Jesus Christ. But not only this – not Luthers sole scripture, but scripture plus teaching of the Church.

**

 

[1holycatholic]

“Our holy mother, the Church, holds and teaches that God, the first principle and last end of all things, can be known with certainty from the created world by the natural light of human reason.”

Of course that is so, but to philosophise about whatever man is philosophising about, is making own thoughts about whatsoever subject – be it religions, ways of life, thoughts of nonhuman creations or whatever.

Christianity does not allow “Philosophical Proofs For the Existence of God”, for Jesus Christ revealed God to the extend we can conceive the extremely huge „subject“. And proof can’t be, for it takes believe to be Child of God.
Moreover … Jesus founded His Church, that holds and teaches Jesus word.

So; how on earth could philosophical ways of thinking, bring about more perception – or even “proof for the existence of God” ?!
Believe and faith brings proof to the individual - not to all. Philosophy can’t do that (philosophy anyway always had been a first step in science of any subject). Athests call Theology a form of Philosophy - it’s not.

Atheists think, that “all this religious stuff of Christianity” is nothing but philosophical search to the question “is there a God?”.
The Church, we Catholics do not need any Philosophical Proofs For the Existence of God, as we have the very clear word of Jesus Christ. But not only this – not Luthers sole scripture, but scripture plus teaching of the Church.

 

[Xuan]

Believing in a particular version of a god or in a religion is much more about having faith (belief without proof) in people than in having faith in the god. We learn about it from people, who learned about it from other people, and so on back to copies of copies of edited and tweaked and reedited and re-tweaked texts.

The single tribal god turns into a 3 in 1 god with all sorts of convoluted explanations as to how it works and why it has to be this way. And we’re told not to question it because this person says so. And this person says that he’s taking this god’s place on earth because this god said so.

It’s all about trusting whether or not what these people say, and believe, is true. The whole foundation of the thing is believing in these people. Only then do we get to the part about believing in their version of the god.

Each religion has a story. And the point of the story is generally to tell us to be good. We’re each born with a brain and a conscience. When used properly, they also tell us to be good. We know this through experience; a virtuous life is much more fulfilling than a non-virtuous one.

If buying into a particular religion helps us to be better, that’s good. But when we’re told that bad is really good, or that the end justifies the means, then it’s time to reconsider just how much faith we want to put into these people. It’s not about belief in the eternal being; it’s about belief in “their version” of the eternal being.

Picking your own god? I don’t think so. Looking at it from a particular point of view, especially by someone subscribing to a particular version, it could be construed that way. But, if there is an eternal being, I don’t think there’s more than one. It’s about relying on our brain and conscience rather than on other people’s opinions and hearsay to learn what we can about it.

In the end, though, I don’t think it’s nearly as much about what one believes as it is about how one lives one’s life.

 

[warpspeedpetey]

Believing in a particular version of a god or in a religion is much more about having faith (belief without proof) in people than in having faith in the god. We learn about it from people, who learned about it from other people, and so on back to copies of copies of edited and tweaked and reedited and re-tweaked texts.

the church was physically there and witness to Christ. we still have the bones of Peter, etc. if the claim is that the faith is made up, there is a historical trail all the way back to Galilee

if the argument is that you dont trust us, then i might h=ask how you can trust anything you didn’t witness, maybe the Constitution is fake, maybe the illuminatti run the world, etc.

my point being that at some point you have to trust someone.

The single tribal god turns into a 3 in 1 god with all sorts of convoluted explanations as to how it works and why it has to be this way

.

the messianic prophecies indicate that we always new there was a Messiah, He didn’t one day just turn into 3 He always was. now understanding such a concept as 3 in 1 is completely foreign to the human mind. but we cant explain quantum mechanics either, for essentially the same reason. it doesnt fit with our normal understanding of the world.

And we’re told not to question it because this person says so. And this person says that he’s taking this god’s place on earth because this god said so.

i dont know who told you not to question it, but they were wrong.

but Christ did not take G-ds place on earth, He is G-d, who sacrificed Himself for the sins of man because those sacrifices normmally performed couldnt be made fast enough or often enough to make up for the wickedness, of man.

He was G-ds son, the perfect, once for all sacrifice. prefigured in the Abraham/Isaac episode. unlike that G-d completed the sacrifice and sealed the covenant forever.

It’s all about trusting whether or not what these people say, and believe, is true. The whole foundation of the thing is believing in these people. Only then do we get to the part about believing in their version of the god

.

the mathematical odds of the messianic prohphecies being fulfilled inthe person of Christ leaves no room for doubt. if we only count the most specific prophesies, then we still wind up with gigantic odds, many times the odds of winning the lottery

its just not mathematically reasonable to doubt Christianity, and that is the original reason that so many believed. this is unique to Christianity.

Each religion has a story. And the point of the story is generally to tell us to be good. We’re each born with a brain and a conscience. When used properly, they also tell us to be good. We know this through experience; a virtuous life is much more fulfilling than a non-virtuous one.

yes a virtuous life is good

If buying into a particular religion helps us to be better, that’s good. But when we’re told that bad is really good, or that the end justifies the means, then it’s time to reconsider just how much faith we want to put into these people. It’s not about belief in the eternal being; it’s about belief in “their version” of the eternal being

.

luckily we have a 5,000 year history involving tens of billions of Jews and Christains, out of the millions who have been in charge, how can you really say they are part of some conspiracy? there was never a smaller group of people involved in the tradition, when was there an oppurtunity to hoodwink people, and what would be the motive?

Picking your own god? I don’t think so. Looking at it from a particular point of view, especially by someone subscribing to a particular version, it could be construed that way. But, if there is an eternal being, I don’t think there’s more than one. It’s about relying on our brain and conscience rather than on other people’s opinions and hearsay to learn what we can about it.

In the end, though, I don’t think it’s nearly as much about what one believes as it is about how one lives one’s life.

unfortunately, as you didn’t create yourself, and nothing is created without purpose, self examination wont reveal that.

you have some serious misunderstandings of Christainity, can i ask what your catachesis was, where you got these ideas?

 

[Xuan]

but Christ did not take G-ds place on earth, He is G-d, who sacrificed Himself for the sins of man because those sacrifices normmally performed couldnt be made fast enough or often enough to make up for the wickedness, of man.

luckily we have a 5,000 year history involving tens of billions of Jews and Christains, out of the millions who have been in charge, how can you really say they are part of some conspiracy? there was never a smaller group of people involved in the tradition, when was there an oppurtunity to hoodwink people, and what would be the motive?

you have some serious misunderstandings of Christainity, can i ask what your catachesis was, where you got these ideas?

I wasn’t talking about Christ; I was talking about the pope.

Who said anything about conspiracy? As I said, these people believe it.

My catechesis? We didn’t have a Catholic school, but in elementary school I served Mass every day before school, and Catechism on Saturday. I attended a Jesuit boarding high school, and went on to graduate from Notre Dame. I’ve had a pretty complete catechesis.

I know the Church teachings on all these things you’ve mentioned. When I said “Can a man do that?” in reference to eating meat on Fridays, I was being facetious. Maybe so much in-depth exposure and study has led me to so many discrepancies. Maybe I just don’t have “the gift of faith.” I don’t know. I tried for so long to believe what all these people told me, but it just wouldn’t take.

My phrasing of things other than the way the Church phrases them isn’t an indication of ignorance about Church teaching. It’s more about dispensing with platitudes and giving a direct opinion, maybe from a little different perspective. That used to irk the priests sometimes, too.

 

[warpspeedpetey]

I wasn’t talking about Christ; I was talking about the pope.

He doesn’t take the place of G-d on earth. He simply holds the Petrine authority from matt 16:18

Who said anything about conspiracy? As I said, these people believe it.

 

[JDaniel]

Believing in a particular version of a god or in a religion is much more about having faith (belief without proof) in people than in having faith in the god. We learn about it from people, who learned about it from other people, and so on back to copies of copies of edited and tweaked and reedited and re-tweaked texts.

Where on earth did you get that gibberish from? Is this stuff a “creation” from your exquisite little brain? Have you ever witnessed a translating of the ancient texts and manuscripts? Probably not. Well, I have. None of those documents has been “edited or tweaked” such that they distort the true communication of the original author. Translators try, by a process of elimination, to derive the most substantive word to translate a word from the original language to. They peruse every instance available where a word is used in other writings from that time period, normally, announcements, news items and letters.

I witnessed many of those documents being translated at Yale University, in 1963. As now, Yale was not known then for its overly pro-religious attitude. (sarcasm intended) Yale is, as it was then, predominantly secular. If someone there wanted to out the verity of the translation, they could have done so easily. The room was open to anyone. Heck, they even let me in!

The single tribal god turns into a 3 in 1 god with all sorts of convoluted explanations as to how it works and why it has to be this way. And we’re told not to question it because this person says so. And this person says that he’s taking this god’s place on earth because this god said so.

Try to honestly think about what you’ve said here. Especially in light of what I’ve told you above. You sound as though you are angry at someone. Focus in on that person.

It’s all about trusting whether or not what these people say, and believe, is true. The whole foundation of the thing is believing in these people. Only then do we get to the part about believing in their version of the god.

Sounds like the expression of more anger, or resentment.

Each religion has a story. And the point of the story is generally to tell us to be good. We’re each born with a brain and a conscience. When used properly, they also tell us to be good. We know this through experience; a virtuous life is much more fulfilling than a non-virtuous one.

And, some more.

If buying into a particular religion helps us to be better, that’s good. But when we’re told that bad is really good, or that the end justifies the means, then it’s time to reconsider just how much faith we want to put into these people. It’s not about belief in the eternal being; it’s about belief in “their version” of the eternal being.

If that was in fact the case, why not simply leave out all of the bad stuff? They could have carved out the bad-god stuff and given us just the good-god stuff.

Picking your own god? I don’t think so. Looking at it from a particular point of view, especially by someone subscribing to a particular version, it could be construed that way. But, if there is an eternal being, I don’t think there’s more than one. It’s about relying on our brain and conscience rather than on other people’s opinions and hearsay to learn what we can about it.

Are you providing a rationale for life as a hermit? Not trying to be mean, just trying to figure out how this happened to you.

In the end, though, I don’t think it’s nearly as much about what one believes as it is about how one lives one’s life.

Well, that’s part of it.

Suggestion: be calm. Try to be a bit more thoughtful. Try to get concepts clearer in your mind. The muddiness will begin to dissipate. Again, focus in on who might have hurt you.

jd

 

[Namesake]

the point of the analogy was that you didn’t know what your parents knew, you couldn’t do what your parents could do, and therefore you were expected to follow a different set of rules than your parents.

im pointing out the the general nature of the human/G-d relationship.

and yes, as the creator and owner of everything, including all people, it is just fine for G-d to kill babies, grandmas, cousins, senators, servants, and taxicab drivers. anyone atall.

just as you can dispose of your property in any way you wish, so can G-d

That isn’t a God I can I will tolerate and so I reject Him. He isn’t a part of my life. In fact, in my life that god doesn’t exist. You are welcome to such a monster, hideous god if you insist.

 

[JDaniel]

I wasn’t talking about Christ; I was talking about the pope.

Who said anything about conspiracy? As I said, these people believe it.

My catechesis? We didn’t have a Catholic school, but in elementary school I served Mass every day before school, and Catechism on Saturday. I attended a Jesuit boarding high school, and went on to graduate from Notre Dame. I’ve had a pretty complete catechesis.

I know the Church teachings on all these things you’ve mentioned. When I said “Can a man do that?” in reference to eating meat on Fridays, I was being facetious. Maybe so much in-depth exposure and study has led me to so many discrepancies. Maybe I just don’t have “the gift of faith.” I don’t know. I tried for so long to believe what all these people told me, but it just wouldn’t take.

My phrasing of things other than the way the Church phrases them isn’t an indication of ignorance about Church teaching. It’s more about dispensing with platitudes and giving a direct opinion, maybe from a little different perspective. That used to irk the priests sometimes, too.

How fortunate you were to be able to go to school where you did; to be handed the cache of knowledge you were handed. Don’t blame yourself. You’re not dumb. Obviously, you have a degree. Is it a B.A. degree, a B.S. degree? Humanities, liberal arts, sciences? If so, you have the background to think much more clearly than you are right now. Don’t worry about it. Just take it as it comes. God bless you for striving.

jd

 

[warpspeedpetey]

That isn’t a God I can I will tolerate

that implies that you know more than G-d, you know right from wrong. thats the exact reason for the fall. Satan tricked Eve into eating the forbidden fruit using that very idea, “you will be like G-d, you will know good from evil.” were his words

then G-d drove them from the Garden for their pride, and we have suffered ever since.

as you dont know what G-d knows, you cant claim to know good from evil, the way he does, you dont see the future results of your everyaction the way he does.

what if hitlers father were killed as a baby? what if the virgins of the midianites were kept, because one of them was albert einsteins great, great, great, grandma? what if?

you dont know the what ifs, you dont respect G-ds rights. you want a G-d that follows your rules

doesn’t make much sensee unless you are smarter and stronger than G-d. is that what your saying?

and so I reject Him

 

[Oreoracle]

doesn’t make much sensee unless you are smarter and stronger than G-d.

Wow. And to think that I was just recently told in my thread that no Christian uses these sort of arguments.

 

[Namesake]