Q
- Status
G
grannymh
Guest
Pardon me. I do not understand the comment – There is no such thing as “objective truth.” Objective means that something exists independently of a person’s opinions, beliefs, etc. An example of an objective truth is that God exists.
Another comment – Yet truth itself is surely only a property of language, determined according to the rules of the particular language game in which you choose to engage. – speaks to subjective reasoning where one chooses according to the rules of a particular language game which is probably appealing. When one rationalizes something, one is using one’s own experiences and knowledge. This is not what is meant by objective truth. An objective truth exists before we are born and after we have died. An objective truth does not need to be affirmed by rationalizing it. However, obviously, it is a great blessing when we can reason or rationalize to the objective truth that God exists.
Another comment – Yet truth itself is surely only a property of language, determined according to the rules of the particular language game in which you choose to engage. – speaks to subjective reasoning where one chooses according to the rules of a particular language game which is probably appealing. When one rationalizes something, one is using one’s own experiences and knowledge. This is not what is meant by objective truth. An objective truth exists before we are born and after we have died. An objective truth does not need to be affirmed by rationalizing it. However, obviously, it is a great blessing when we can reason or rationalize to the objective truth that God exists.
A
agape123
Guest
Absolute proof of God would be in a way an elimination of our free will. We were placed here on earth with free will, in order to choose or not to choose to love God. If we were staring at the face of God from birth, in all of his power and might, we would not be free to choose. God understands that in order for our love to be true, it must be a choice. Therefore, God choses not to reveal himself in such a way that would force the entire population of earth to their knees. He’s giving us some time to decide for ourselves before the second coming of Chirst, when we are all forced to bow down.
That being said, there is plenty of evidence for God. I’m not quite as eloquent on the issue as others, so I will point you to a few resources. First, on answering your questions re: science, religion and cosmology, I suggest “50 questions of truth” by John Polkinghorne, a Physicist and Anglican Priest. Regarding Christian Philosophy on the essence of God, I suggest “Mere Christianity” by CS Lewis for a very logical and precise explanation that is easy to read. Finally, I suggest that you read the Catechism of the Catholic Church. If you are anything like me, you will find that the answers in there tend to speak to you in a way that you somehow know is the truth.
I understand your struggles, as I myself have thought similarly, and continue to do so on occasion. However, I have learned that through taking a step back and listening, God will speak to you in very powerful ways if you’re willing to listen. Now, you could write these experiences off as mere chemical fluctuations in the brain and as something not based in reality. As a Neuroscience major in college, I learned about experiments where people were made to have religious experiences through manipulation of the temporal-parietal junction in the brain. We now know that there is a spiritual center in the brain. At first, this issue bothered be, because it made me feel as though all of my spiritual experiences had been made invalid. I mentioned this to my favorite priest and he looked at me with a smile and replied, “Well of course it’s in your brain! Scientists can alter consciousness by poking an area your brain and making you taste chocolate, but does that mean when you eat a chocolate bar, it’s just a figment of your imagination? Of course not! To me, the fact that there is a spiritual center in our brain is compelling evidence that there is a spiritual being in our environment that we evolved to respond to.”
I hope my answer is somewhat helpful. I do strongly suggest that you read the books I mentioned. At least Polkinghorne and CS Lewis, as they are short and fairly easy reads. Good luck in your search for truth!
That being said, there is plenty of evidence for God. I’m not quite as eloquent on the issue as others, so I will point you to a few resources. First, on answering your questions re: science, religion and cosmology, I suggest “50 questions of truth” by John Polkinghorne, a Physicist and Anglican Priest. Regarding Christian Philosophy on the essence of God, I suggest “Mere Christianity” by CS Lewis for a very logical and precise explanation that is easy to read. Finally, I suggest that you read the Catechism of the Catholic Church. If you are anything like me, you will find that the answers in there tend to speak to you in a way that you somehow know is the truth.
I understand your struggles, as I myself have thought similarly, and continue to do so on occasion. However, I have learned that through taking a step back and listening, God will speak to you in very powerful ways if you’re willing to listen. Now, you could write these experiences off as mere chemical fluctuations in the brain and as something not based in reality. As a Neuroscience major in college, I learned about experiments where people were made to have religious experiences through manipulation of the temporal-parietal junction in the brain. We now know that there is a spiritual center in the brain. At first, this issue bothered be, because it made me feel as though all of my spiritual experiences had been made invalid. I mentioned this to my favorite priest and he looked at me with a smile and replied, “Well of course it’s in your brain! Scientists can alter consciousness by poking an area your brain and making you taste chocolate, but does that mean when you eat a chocolate bar, it’s just a figment of your imagination? Of course not! To me, the fact that there is a spiritual center in our brain is compelling evidence that there is a spiritual being in our environment that we evolved to respond to.”
I hope my answer is somewhat helpful. I do strongly suggest that you read the books I mentioned. At least Polkinghorne and CS Lewis, as they are short and fairly easy reads. Good luck in your search for truth!
0
0thetrooth0
Guest
we dont yet understand our humam nature or the human body, science says we have like 5% active dna and the rest is “junk” dna, it probably isnt junk, if we cud activate it we wud probably be able to do some unnatural things and awaken the divine within,This is a lot of interesting information. However, I need to rephrase my original questions found in post 55 so it is easier to go back to the dawn of human history.
Post 55, "The point is not any faith in anything; the real point is that humans have the capability to think of something beyond one’s natural environment. Go back to the dawn of human history. What do you find in oral stories? Explanations of what? Describe the talent of shamans."
Emphasis added in this post.
At the dawn of human history, before the development of a written language, traditions or history of the past were passed on orally. In Alaska, there are still oral stories being told. Some of these stories are similar to the written “myths” in other parts of the world. Stories or myths explained human history plus they were an attempt at explaining natural phenomena. Think about the stories of the Greek and Roman gods as a later history example. What ties these ancient stories together is “information” which goes beyond the natural environment. Whether or not the “information” is true is not the real point. See sentence in bold above.
Personally, I find shamans very interesting since their talents or skills differ from place to place.
This is from Othetrooth0’s post 61.
“about shamans, theres stories about how they talk to animas and travel to other dimensions, lets say alot of this stuff is true, it only shows that there are things that we dont yet understand and that are beyond science and religion,”
What I would like to do is to shift the focus from things we don’t understand, etc., back to the human person known as a “shaman”. What is it that we do know about this person’s human nature? This is a different question from one asking about a shaman’s beliefs in a personal God that rewards and punishes.
Once we truly understand human nature, then one can use this understanding to demonstrate the existence of God.
human nature seeks to understand their surroundings and tries to find comfort in an uncomfortable world, and to find acceptance, and assurance of a lovely afterlife and thats wher religions comes in unfortunately, alot of humans have a feeling and desre for something beyong the natural world but doesnt mean a cosmic being exists, alot of people believe in energies and chakras while science says thats false, i think thats something beyong the natural world if you ask me, they focus on having healthy chakras and activating their third eye, then theres people who achieve high states of meditation and have an experience if you will, they feel oneness emptiness etc, they never label it as God,
Q
Qoeleth
Guest
Yes, there is no experience of ‘reality’ which is unmediated by language/concepts/ interpretations. Consider the statement: “God exists in reality”. Whether it qualifies as “true” depends entirely upon what one means by “God”, “exists”, “reality”, and “true”. Yet these words cannot be defined by any fixed non-verbal referent. Furthermore, the meaning of the words which form a proposition is neither entirely subjective (in the sense that language is never entirely private- cf. Wittgenstien), nor is it objective (since the intention and signification of language depends upon subject/s * rather than object [referents]). Therefore, there is no purely objective ‘truth’ to any proposition. For this reason, I humbly submit it is meaningless to engage in argument about whiat is ‘objectively’ true.*
J
jochoa
Guest
Thank you very much Nicko for taking the time to consider and share your thoughts on my understandings! I look forward to growing in perspective through discussion with you!
You are definitely correct in that the honest thing is to admit that we do not know. And that is definitely where my journey in finding the Truth began → Agnosticism. However, since we do not know whether there is life after death, the smart thing is to place our hope in something Heavenly.
Please consider the following concept:
I am not claiming one must have faith in God or Heaven. The object of faith is left to be discussed.
Essentially, the idea is to recognize that thinking and having faith are interchangeable because they are both of the mentality of not knowing.
Example: I have faith the Dallas Cowboys will make it to the playoffs next year, because I think the Dallas Cowboys will make it to the playoffs next year, since I do not know if the Dallas Cowboys will make it to the playoffs next year.
Fair enough, without consideration for beliefs, in consideration of the following, where is it not Truth?
Every person wants and fulfills various wants, therefore we all want happiness. However in order to experience a genuine happiness, there must be peace. And in order to have peace, there must be complete patience, and in order to experience any degree of happiness, there must be kindness. Therefore, it can be said that if a person wants to experience unbreakable peace and perfect happiness, the greatest actions in living to master are patience and kindness.
Please recognize that is unnecessary to believe that the Bible is the revealed Word of God. Consider only facts: the first declaration of patience and kindness being the greatest actions to master is found in chapter 13 of the first book of Corinthians. Since this is Truth, the honorable thing to do is to admit the author of chapter 13 line 4 and 13 of the first book of Corinthians deserves credit. Then it becomes factual that the author gives all credit to God. It is also factual that the only method this Word was passed along and kept alive was through the saints and martyrs of Catholicism. Therefore, the honest thing to do is give the Church credit too.
This is not intended to impress someone. This is intended to answer the question: What would count as absolute proof that the Holy Bible is Truth?
Does the greater explanation of the Truths shed greater understanding on this concept?
I hope you will heavily consider the following: Naturally, our minds have desires, our bodies have separate desires, and since our will proceeds from a combination of the body and the mind’s desires, it produces even more varying desires.
Although you think you have a lack of faith, you declared your faith that God does not exists. And if you think your complete person (body, mind, spirit, and will) has genuinely accepted your lack of faith, why has your will led you to research, consider, and respond to topics regarding God and the Fullness of Truth of His Church?
Thoughts?
G
grannymh
Guest
Yes, there is no experience of ‘reality’ which is unmediated by language/concepts/ interpretations. Consider the statement: “God exists in reality”. Whether it qualifies as “true” depends entirely upon what one means by “God”, “exists”, “reality”, and “true”. Yet these words cannot be defined by any fixed non-verbal referent. Furthermore, the meaning of the words which form a proposition is neither entirely subjective (in the sense that language is never entirely private- cf. Wittgenstien), nor is it objective (since the intention and signification of language depends upon subject/s * rather than object [referents]). Therefore, there is no purely objective ‘truth’ to any proposition. For this reason, I humbly submit it is meaningless to engage in argument about whiat is ‘objectively’ true.*
Emphasis mine.
God exists objectively because whatever qualifies as true, exists, or reality, does not change, alter, dismiss, or improve God’s existence. Furthermore, God exists is an objective truth because He exists before any proposition is made or not made.
God exists is an objective truth because His existence does not depend on any experience of ‘reality’ which is mediated or unmediated by language/concepts/ interpretations. In other words, language/concepts/interpretations do not have any power over God’s existence.
It is indeed difficult to discuss actual objective truth on CAF because for some reason many, not all, posters merge objective and subjective into a Mulligan stew.
Maybe a simple sentence like God exists objectively may be the necessary truth to reasonably demonstrate His existence.
G
grannymh
Guest
First, our will does not proceed from a combination of the body and the mind’s separate desires nor does it produce even more varying desires. Our will is the spiritual soul’s ability to choose or not to choose an action.
It is important to understand the Catholic description of human nature. Human nature, in itself, unites both the material and spiritual worlds. It is the unique union of spirit and matter which forms a single nature, that of the person. Both the intellect and the will are faculties of the spiritual soul.
B
Bradski
Guest
The question isn’t worded correctly. It should read: What would count as absolute proof that my God exists?
Let me put it this way: If Christianity was the only religion on the planet, then there would be a lot less atheists. If there were people in a recently discovered area deep in the Amazon unknown to any civilisation who had been worshipping Jesus for the last 2,000 years, there would be a lot less atheists. If we discovered ancient Inca writings that specifically told of God sending His only son to be sacrificed about 2,000 years ago, there would be a lot less atheists.
Let me put it this way: If Christianity was the only religion on the planet, then there would be a lot less atheists. If there were people in a recently discovered area deep in the Amazon unknown to any civilisation who had been worshipping Jesus for the last 2,000 years, there would be a lot less atheists. If we discovered ancient Inca writings that specifically told of God sending His only son to be sacrificed about 2,000 years ago, there would be a lot less atheists.
G
grannymh
Guest
Human nature, as described by Catholicism, refers to the unique nature of our species. Catholicism describes human nature as an unique unification of the material body and the immaterial spiritual soul. In addition, we often speak of our nature in reference to our individual characteristics, dispositions, ways we do things, or as you mention what we seek. Our nature can also have a feeling and desire for something beyond the immediate natural world.
However, there is more to our nature than feelings and desires. There is the recognition that the supernatural does exist. This recognition has existed since the dawn of human history when supernatural concepts were referred to in the early myths and traditions of the “first people”. Eventually supernatural concepts turned into gods. The god Thor was recognized as the supernatural source for thunder. The fact that thunder is a natural event is not the point. The point is that minds had the capability to think of sources beyond those in the natural environment, i.e., supernatural sources.
In another sense, ancient minds such as the early Romans and Greeks were able to reason, using a form of allegory. For example, characteristics of humans were applied to their gods as a way of understanding these supernatural beings which were the sources for good crops, victory in wars, etc. The capacity to create concepts beyond the natural need for food, shelter, and copulation is in only one species, the human one.
Both human and animal anatomies are material/physical. What made the difference between our species and others had to be something non-material, something beyond the natural, something supernatural, something spiritual as contrasted to material/physical anatomies. What I am driving at is that our own nature is material blood and guts anatomy along with an immaterial spiritual principle known as our rational soul; otherwise, we could never have thought of anything being supernatural or spiritual. Being able to think in supernatural concepts, our nature could also seek the supernatural. In addition, our free will could choose the kind of supernatural which would benefit us.
The human nature skills of thinking, including all that it entails, and choosing are found in all cultures throughout history. The choice of rejecting supernatural concepts has not erased the ability to think and reason found in humans today.
Back in post 40, forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=9039746&postcount=40
my point 1. was-- If one can swing a bat, it doesn’t make any difference if one hits a baseball or a watermelon, the first important thing is that the person has the capability to swing a bat. This post has demonstrated that humans do have the capability to recognize [swing the bat at] the supernatural regardless of what it is, baseball or watermelon. Point 2. was that the person with the bat knows the difference between a baseball and a watermelon. The analogy is that early humans and ourselves also know differences between supernatural concepts. Or at the least, we can learn the differences.
Obviously, I am approaching a demonstration that God exists from an unique direction, that of preparation before the demonstration.
Any comments?
N
Nicko
Guest
And I thought this pointless discussion only happened on atheist forums!
It seems to me a confusion between “truth” and our perception of it.
That each individual has their own perception of reality cannot be denied. But unless one is a solopsist, one must admit there is an actual reality referenced by our perceptions.
Even if reality was actually, not just apparently, different for each observer - if truth were really relative - that in itself would constitute an objective truth about reality.
G
grannymh
Guest
Bingo!And I thought this pointless discussion only happened on atheist forums!
It seems to me a confusion between “truth” and our perception of it.
If you will help me out with vocabulary, we may be able to clear at least some of the basic confusion, if not all of it.
I am in total awe of our own human nature. The very fact that our thoughts can reach beyond the needs (food, shelter and copulation) of our anatomy to the recognition that there is a very strong possibility that the supernatural exists is for me a demonstration that God does exist. This is not exactly my own proof for God from my youth, but it is close.
To get back to your sentence “That each individual has their own perception of reality cannot be denied.” Of course that is true due to our nature as a species and also due to our nature as described by 0thetrooth0 in post 83, second paragraph forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=9044694&postcount=83
We are a both-and kind of species. We are both material and immaterial.
Being rational (which is an immaterial principle of our being even though our thoughts can be expressed by our physical brain and neural system), we can reflect on our own nature as to how our perceptions of reality are formed. How is the operative word. I am not thinking about truth per se. I am thinking of the reality of a real chair for example in a real store. A chair that I could buy. This is the point where I need to make sure that I am understanding “perceptions” as you understand them.
Regarding the chair, I view the word perceptions as coming from two different sources of information. I see two different ways as to “how” my perceptions about the chair are formed. I can look at the price tag and I can imagine the chair, which is my favorite color, in a particular spot in my home. In this example, do you see two different kinds of perceptions, both real, both useful as I debate about buying the chair?
There are times when I cannot chew gum and walk at the same time. Could we first discuss the perceptions about the chair?
G
grannymh
Guest
In my humble opinion, your **my “**What would count as absolute proof that my God exists?” would be part of a discussion regarding peoples’ perceptions beginning in Post 90
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=9046370&postcount=90
M
Myqyl
Guest
Just a thought… Perhaps it’s not a problem with how God shows Himself. Perhaps humans are just incredibly dense and can’t see the obvious.
I can easily picture this scene… A Truth Seeker watches a spectacular sunset at the end of a wonderful day… Then posts a thread on how God doesn’t make Himself obvious enough… To which God says “WHAT? Weren’t you watching?!? OK, Let’s try it again tomorrow…”
Just a thought.
God bless
E
empther
Guest
This was discussed on the catholic.org forums.
It was when Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead that the Jewish leaders began plotting against him.
Judas had been following Jesus around for three years and had seen all his miracles.
This is how human beings work. When presented with a clear cut decision some will go one way and some will go the other.
If God’s appearance would cause everyone to be saved, count on it, he would appear today.
But maybe he knows it would have the opposite effect on too many people.
0
0thetrooth0
Guest
Absolute proof of God would be in no way eliminating our free will heres why, one word satan/shaytan, obviously something got screwed up here, satan was seeing God face to face and knew exactly what God was capable of and still refused to obey/listen/not be humble/etc, and also in islam God told satan to bow down to mankind and he refused, why in the world would satan not listen to God when God was speaking to him directly! perhaps when we first see God will be in shock and awe but as time passes will regain our free will, which we always had, and choose the dark path, seeing God would belike seeing your brother or mother, will get used to it
alot of people who dont believe in God ,do indeed believe there is a spiritual center in the brain aka third eye/pineal gland
0
0thetrooth0
Guest
I think by God appearing most people or a good portion would be saved, Most people would repent and avoid evil and do good. And it take the doubts of atheists that God doesnt exist and it will confirm to believers that Gods does exist. Its a win win situation.
How can it have the opposite effect, it makes no sense.
J
jochoa
Guest
I definitely agree in the unity of heart/body/feelings, mind/thoughts, soul/spirit, and strength/will/thinking/feeling/acting, and that the will proceeds from the spirit/soul as well. However, in order to grow in closer union with the Spirit of God, I have I found it necessary to differentiate between the faculties. And in attempts to explain the concept of producing various desires, please consider the following:
Consider the following “will” of:
I will go to morning Mass.
For this simple will to occur, there are several events and possible variations of desires that must occur:
- My mind must willfully think about all that is required to go to Mass. Now I can either want to think about it or not want to. However, if I have dedicated my will to going to mass, whether I want to or not want to think about it will only affect the quality of my peace and happiness when getting ready and going to Mass. If I do not want to think about it and force myself to think about it, I will experience frustration and thoughts outside of peace and happiness. If I want to think about it, I will be getting to do what I am wanting to do, and therefore will be peaceful and happy doing it.
- My body must willfully act in accordance with what the mind is telling it to do. Now my body can either want to or not want to act. To recognize if the body wants to here are some factors: Does the body have enough energy? Is the face smiling? Are the muscles relaxed? Once again, if my body wants to, it will be smiling, energetic, and relaxed, whereas if it does not want to my body will have various forms of indicating it is out of peace and happiness.
In the above scenario, I willed going to Mass. Had I not willed going to Mass, I would have willed something else, perhaps sleeping late. The act of willfully going to Mass would produce various desires of thought and action in comparison to willfully remaining asleep. I would have wanted to think deeper about God’s Sacrifice for us and my body would have willed sitting, standing, kneeling, walking, etc. at Church, whereas sleeping my mind may have wanted to will some dreaming about Heaven, and my body would have willed resting!
Thoughts?
J
jochoa
Guest
My thoughts:
Although you are somewhat correct if God made His Existence and Power known without faith, but this does not take into account the fullness of God’s purpose for creation. If God only wanted to create beings to worship Him, even through the fear of punishment through disobedience, and so He could hear their applause and so they may possibly experience a limitless happiness, if they live correctly, this would not allow Him to experience a limitless happiness. Our purpose is also to help Him experience a limitless happiness in the Kingdom of Heaven. In order to do this, we must demonstrate that we can be unconditionally (without fear) and perfectly patient and kind and motivated for God, so that if He let’s us into His Kingdom of Heaven, He knows He does not have to know everything (what you are thinking and what you will do in the future), and therefore allow Himself to enjoy an everlasting unbreakable peace and potential for limitless happiness.
Therefore, forcing His creations to be obedient through fear, would cancel out the potential for unbreakable peace because the act of fearing is indication of the state of being out of peace. The act of being conditionally obedient removes the opportunity to demonstrate being unconditionally patient and kind and motivated for God.
Simply stated, your scenario is not a win-win because God would not win, He would remain neutral.
Thoughts?
B
BellsMom
Guest
I’m not an atheist as I understand the technical definition, more of an agnostic I guess. I don’t dismiss the possibility of a creator.
I would defiantly be convinced of his existence with some real communication between him and us. Not the “listen with your heart” or “look at the wonder all around you” sort of communication.
I would like a giant guy up in the sky speaking to all of humanity in their own languages, an explanation of why this all is and what his intentions are, add to that some miracles like all the deserts blooming with wheat and grains for starving countries or all of the pollution we’ve poured into our lakes, streams and oceans miraculously disappearing and I’m on board!
I can’t say that any of this would actually make me a christian though. I may believe he is god and our creator and that Jesus was divine but until I can understand the “problem of evil” (I know many people say there is no problem but there is for me) I can’t say I would love him.
I would defiantly be convinced of his existence with some real communication between him and us. Not the “listen with your heart” or “look at the wonder all around you” sort of communication.
I would like a giant guy up in the sky speaking to all of humanity in their own languages, an explanation of why this all is and what his intentions are, add to that some miracles like all the deserts blooming with wheat and grains for starving countries or all of the pollution we’ve poured into our lakes, streams and oceans miraculously disappearing and I’m on board!
I can’t say that any of this would actually make me a christian though. I may believe he is god and our creator and that Jesus was divine but until I can understand the “problem of evil” (I know many people say there is no problem but there is for me) I can’t say I would love him.
- Status