What would count as absolute proof that God exists?

[Myqyl]

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.

Perhaps an all knowing God knows better than you and I do?

Just saying…

 

[0thetrooth0]

why dont we just admit that we dont know,

we can be compared to ants, ants are smart they build cities even wage wars against eachother build complex highways, etc. none of us would say that when they die theyll go to heaven or something, if other aliens came theyd probably look at us like we look at ants, ants are so insignificant to us right? they just exist, there going to die and thats it dont have such a big ego, just like the people that say were gods, their ego is out of the roof

threads always get off track,

 

[0thetrooth0]

instead of making a new thread i ll ask the question here

why does God allow animals to suffer?

youtube.com/watch?v=Op0kJ0N0p0M

the girl has some other arguments if you want to rebuke

but i want to know why? all animals do is just live to survive, some of them spend all their time running away from other predators, why did God do this?

 

[Nicko]

Supernatural refers to an order of existence. There are two orders of existence 1. the material/physical world, i.e., universe, and 2. the immaterial/non-physical spiritual world which lies outside our ordinary experience of material objects. Note; the two orders of existence exist side by side…

You continue to use spatial descriptions to define the “supernatural” whilst denying that the “natural” and “supernatural” are separated by a spatial boundary.

I agree that my question as to whether one could reach the “supernatural” by rocketship was absurd. This absurdity results from the use of spatial terms to define the “supernatural”. Yet you seem to be unable to talk about this concept without resorting to such spatial terms (bolded in the quote).

Certainly I am aware that people who believe that reality is subdivided into the “supernatural” and the natural believe that it is also subdivided into the “spiritual” and the physical; into the material and “immaterial”. But it is the subdivision itself that I am questioning. Defending the “supernatural” as a valid subdivision of reality simply by reference to other terms that can be criticised on the same grounds as “supernatural” doesn’t seem to make the concept any more coherent or meaningful.

To put it another way, what distinguishes the “supernatural/spiritual/immaterial/whatever” from the rest of reality?

In other words, the first peoples at the beginning of human history, knew instinctively about the supernatural.

Like they instinctively “knew” that the world was flat?

Remember, you are talking about people who thought that the majority of phenomena that they encountered were “supernatural”. Does this mean that lightning was “supernatural” until it was explained, at which point it became “natural”?

This would seem to suggest that “supernatural” merely means “unexplained”.

 

[grannymh]

You continue to use spatial descriptions to define the “supernatural” whilst denying that the “natural” and “supernatural” are separated by a spatial boundary.

I agree that my question as to whether one could reach the “supernatural” by rocketship was absurd. This absurdity results from the use of spatial terms to define the “supernatural”. Yet you seem to be unable to talk about this concept without resorting to such spatial terms (bolded in the quote).

Certainly I am aware that people who believe that reality is subdivided into the “supernatural” and the natural believe that it is also subdivided into the “spiritual” and the physical; into the material and “immaterial”. But it is the subdivision itself that I am questioning. Defending the “supernatural” as a valid subdivision of reality simply by reference to other terms that can be criticised on the same grounds as “supernatural” doesn’t seem to make the concept any more coherent or meaningful.

To put it another way, what distinguishes the “supernatural/spiritual/immaterial/whatever” from the rest of reality?

Like they instinctively “knew” that the world was flat?

Remember, you are talking about people who thought that the majority of phenomena that they encountered were “supernatural”. Does this mean that lightning was “supernatural” until it was explained, at which point it became “natural”?

This would seem to suggest that “supernatural” merely means “unexplained”.

May I respectfully point out that I am more interested in the person and not so much in the environment. If there is lightning, that is part of the environment. I am more interested in the person observing the lightning so it really doesn’t matter what lightning was called back then or what it is called now.

However, I have not completed posting about human nature. My apology that I have been slow with that. However, sometimes it is good to wait for feedback.

Maybe there are some kind of spatial descriptions and subdivisions. Personally, I prefer basic simplicity as a start. For example, there are two realities generally known as natural (matter) and supernatural (spirit) although the names in the post above can also be used.

FYI At the moment, the point I am developing is that humans have the capability to think of something beyond their natural environment. Because humans can think and make decisions, there will be different worldviews. Many people consider the natural environment as their only reality. I can accept that. Nonetheless, the spiritual reality does exist even when it is denied and/or made fun of.

 

[Pfaffenhoffen]

Thanks for being honest. In return, I’ll make it even easier for you, name three instead.

As for your challenge:

1. Miracle of the Sun (Fatima)
2. Lourdes
3. Guadalupe Tilma
4. Padre Pio
5. Eucharistic Miracle of Lanciano

Just for a little help:

click here please

 

[RCCB]

When a scientist believes he has ‘stumbled’ upon any new insight, he will seek by experiment to test his hypothesis in the expectation of a desired and specific result to both demonstrate and confirm potential progress in understanding. The very act of testing is an act of faith on the part of the scientist. As we all know sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn’t. Should the results offer direct evidence, he will then publishes his means to ends so that others may test and confirm the insight or expose error in his method. Such open and transparent scrutiny is the hallmark of good science.

Similarly, for any literal and irrefutable proof of God to exist, it would have to begin with a truth claim, a newly revealed insight into the human condition, a hypothesis, existing outside natural reason, one that could be tested by an act of faith in the expectation of a defined result with a demonstration of divine omnipotence and omniscience. Similarly the results should be repeatable by any who shared the same ‘faith’. And just as in the scientific model, once sufficiently tested and demonstrated to be solid fact, it would be quite irrational not to accept the new insight.

While quite contrary to all existing tradition and teaching, there is plenty of highly suggestive Biblical material, and a great deal more non canonical material which easily plugs in to such an empirical conception of religion, at least in the abstract!

 

[johnnyjones]

The concept that the world was round didn’t enter into realistic scientific conversation for centuries after this verse. Isiaah 40:22 - “He sits enthroned above the CIRCLE of the earth.” Many scientific unknowns are seen in the scriptures. More to follow as needed.

 

[jochoa]

why dont we just admit that we dont know,

What exactly are you wanting us to admit that we do not know?

why does God allow animals to suffer?

In order to reasonably ponder this question, please answer one question:
Since you have faith God created everything, what do you believe is His purpose for creation?

If your belief is not in alignment with the first Catechism of the Catholic Church, you are going to have a difficult time finding a reasonable solution.

If you will adopt CCC #1 as your belief, you will have the foundation to come to a reasonable solution to your question.

CCC #1 states: “God, infinitely perfect and blessed in himself, in a plan of sheer goodness freely created man to make him share in his own blessed life.”
From this, one can deduce that God is perfect at being patient and kind and motivated, therefore He is blessed with unbreakable peace, perfect happiness, and unstoppable energy. Now if His purpose for creation is to bring free-willed beings, who are created in His likeness, to become perfect at patience, kindness, and motivation as to experience the same blessings, then when the creations unite with God in the Kingdom of Heaven, the society will be able to experience a limitless happiness in addition to unbreakable peace and unstoppable energy.

Given this purpose for creation, the incredibly challenging aspects are to:

1. Create free-willed beings. This is particularly challenging because the instance a being knows it has been created by an all-powerful creator, it knows it can be destroyed by the same creator, thereby removing unbreakable peace because there is fear. Therefore, this is the first cause of an extremely difficult plan.
2. Guide the purposeful creations to unconditionally perfect patience, kindness, and motivation. In His perfection He knew to ensure the plan would work before making it happen and to help the creations know the incredible depths of unconditional love, this is where the Word comes into effect.

Therefore, the reason God allows living beings to suffer is because He wants us to have free-will. Please know that He want us to have free-will for our own good, as well as His own good. Therefore, there are only two methods in which God can remove suffering:

1. Take away free-will of all living beings, but nobody can genuinely want this because it is purposeless.
2. Create a Heaven and Earth, of which serve two purposes:
   The Heaven is the Kingdom of God of which every person, including God, of the Kingdom has demonstrated to be open to being teachable and/or unconditionally patient, kind, and motivated, thereby permitting free-will with the everlasting experiences of unbreakable peace and limitless happiness.
   The Earth is where we are each given the opportunity to choose to either be perfectly loving for the sake of peace and happiness and energy, or something else.

Thoughts?

 

[johnnyjones]

I understand what your saying mostly based on the scriptually accurate concept of free will. I have always thought, in my limited human mind, that there “could have been a better way.” I mean we all struggle with pain and suffering so those thought can get a hold of you.

I have faith the size of a mustard seed because of suffering and pain. This earth allows and contains some of the most gruesome and unbelievably wicked acts the mind could conjure up. A God that can make all things could surely do away with all that pain I have thought. Jesus was tempted in the desert with that scenario. Basically- Satan said I’ll take away all your pain and give you comfort and power over all the majestys of the world. Jesus resisted for something greater and embraced suffering. It’s a hard mystery. Free will has always been something I have deeply pondered.

 

[grannymh]

What exactly are you wanting us to admit that we do not know?

In order to reasonably ponder this question, please answer one question:
Since you have faith God created everything, what do you believe is His purpose for creation?

If your belief is not in alignment with the first Catechism of the Catholic Church, you are going to have a difficult time finding a reasonable solution.

If you will adopt CCC #1 as your belief, you will have the foundation to come to a reasonable solution to your question.

CCC #1 states: “God, infinitely perfect and blessed in himself, in a plan of sheer goodness freely created man to make him share in his own blessed life.”

One can read the rest of CCC #1 with this link. One can also enter the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition, at this link, in order to continue reading.
scborromeo.org/ccc/para/1.htm

 

[RCCB]

As we approach Easter, a little alternative contemplation on ‘Proof’ and the Resurrection. What if the Resurrection of Jesus has been completely misunderstood? What if that event was meant as a demonstration of God’s willingness to intervene directly into the natural world for all who do his will? Paving the way, by faith, for our own access to Divine transcendence. Could the ‘first Resurrection’ be a metaphor for such an individual intervention that would confirm divine will, law and covenant. Possibly offering some new moral insight consistent with His moral purpose. That would be some proof!

 

[serious123]

the nice thing for God to so is to appear to us, now obviously we humans would know theres a God, the only thing tha shud change is that God tests us even harder than before or makes us suffer more so we can be wortyh of heaven, the difrence with this scenario and the world we live in today is that in my scenario we would go through all bunch of hardships here on earth but we nwe die we wud KNOW will go to heaven, in the world we live in alot of peeple are doing alot of good and going through alot of hardships all so they can go to heaven possibly. but they DONT know if heaven, God, etc even exist.

CONGRATULATIONS…YOU JUST PROCLAIMED YOURSELF GOD.

Did it ever occur to you that God picked the best of all possibles worlds to reveal who his Children are or did he pick the 976th best plan?

If your plan was the best then you would BE God. You dont get to dictate the terms. Feeling that you actually do–that God must conform to YOU…you have already revealed why your an unbeliever. people who think they can reason better than God have no place in the future.

I believe there is a misconception by some Christians and non Christians on how people believe.

Christians dont “believe” because someone showed us one last piece of evidence that finally convinced us this was all true. This isnt Columbo. Its no detective mission

If we treat belief as the collecting of data, piecing together clues, and then finally obtaining just enough to put us over the hump, we leave ourselves open to that one piece of new evidence that debunks our theory.

Of all the people who I’ve talked to that dont believe in God, not one has ever answered yes to this question…

Have you ever thought to ask God Himself what the truth is?

They search for clues, have arguments with themselves, debating back and forth pros and cons, but never ask God. But why? Well, its usually because they think they’re smarter than the supposed God of this world. In other words, “I can think of a better plan than this–so there cant be a God to ask anyway.”

Dont you think that would block communication with God? Think about it…“I dont understand the plan…so there’s no God.” Isnt one of the definitions of God that he is infinitely smarter than us? Does a dog ever realize why we sent him outside to poop? You see suffering and think…I’ve got better plan. Doesnt a dog think he has a better plan than us too? Havnt we seen Man’s grand plan enough to know we dont have clue?

It takes humility to admit we might not be as wise as we think we are. It takes a child like attitude to say, “God…help me understand. If you are real, help my mind understand it.” If you drop your shields He will put it as a fact in your head. Its not about clues or data. Yes, there is testimony. People have died for it instead of suicide bombed for it. And yes, there are more copies of the Bible on earth than any other book. But ask God himself. That is the answer-- hear the testimony and ask God. No clever arguments will achieve what only God can do.

The vehicle God choose was not to put a burden on you—but HIM. We cant be perfect because have the freewill to think anything we want…(so its possible to choose.) We deserve to be punished for our behavior but God stepped in and took that punishment for us. All he asks is you accept that. His plan is like nothing man would think up. Man would make it hard…God made it as easy as it could be. Accept his offer and live forever. I say, where do I sign up? Man’s idea would be to go on CNN. But God reveals the true state of a human heart by requiring child-like faith. Remember, they killed Christ when they saw him and all the great things he did. So seeing makes no difference because God knows who you are regardless of what you see.

The atheist search for “Proof” is not found in data, but in asking God. God transforms the mind…not data.

I mean think about it. In your search…have you ever thought to ask the source Himself? How about giving that a try. Or are you too proud? Consider this: Could it be this Pride that has blocked you from God’s message? Well, if your too proud to bow down before God and ask Him for the Truth…I dont see how you’ll ever find it. This isnt about being smart. I have an IQ that is in the top 5% in the country. Paul, who also was a hater of the truth, was very intelligent, but considered it worthless in the end.

1 Corinthians 1

18For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. 19For it is written:
“I will destroy the wisdom of the wise;
the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate.”[c]

20Where is the wise man? Where is the scholar? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? 21For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe. 22Jews demand miraculous signs and Greeks look for wisdom, 23but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, 24but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. 25For the foolishness of God is wiser than man’s wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than man’s strength.

1 Corinthians 2

This is what we speak, not in words taught us by human wisdom but in words taught by the Spirit, expressing spiritual truths in spiritual words.[c] 14The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned.

His point is you can research all the live long day and it will all be just text on a page unless God reveals it to you. So now that you’ve done your research, ask God for the truth.

 

[grannymh]

CONGRATULATIONS…YOU JUST PROCLAIMED YOURSELF GOD.

Did it ever occur to you that God picked the best of all possibles worlds to reveal who his Children are or did he pick the 976th best plan?

If your plan was the best then you would BE God. You dont get to dictate the terms. Feeling that you actually do–that God must conform to YOU…you have already revealed why your an unbeliever. people who think they can reason better than God have no place in the future.

I believe there is a misconception by some Christians and non Christians on how people believe.

Christians dont “believe” because someone showed us one last piece of evidence that finally convinced us this was all true. This isnt Columbo. Its no detective mission

If we treat belief as the collecting of data, piecing together clues, and then finally obtaining just enough to put us over the hump, we leave ourselves open to that one piece of new evidence that debunks our theory.

Of all the people who I’ve talked to that dont believe in God, not one has ever answered yes to this question…

Have you ever thought to ask God Himself what the truth is?

They search for clues, have arguments with themselves, debating back and forth pros and cons, but never ask God. But why? Well, its usually because they think they’re smarter than the supposed God of this world. In other words, “I can think of a better plan than this–so there cant be a God to ask anyway.”

Dont you think that would block communication with God? Think about it…“I dont understand the plan…so there’s no God.” Isnt one of the definitions of God that he is infinitely smarter than us? Does a dog ever realize why we sent him outside to poop? You see suffering and think…I’ve got better plan. Doesnt a dog think he has a better plan than us too? Havnt we seen Man’s grand plan enough to know we dont have clue?

It takes humility to admit we might not be as wise as we think we are. It takes a child like attitude to say, “God…help me understand. If you are real, help my mind understand it.” If you drop your shields He will put it as a fact in your head. Its not about clues or data. Yes, there is testimony. People have died for it instead of suicide bombed for it. And yes, there are more copies of the Bible on earth than any other book. But ask God himself. That is the answer-- hear the testimony and ask God. No clever arguments will achieve what only God can do.

The vehicle God choose was not to put a burden on you—but HIM. We cant be perfect because have the freewill to think anything we want…(so its possible to choose.) We deserve to be punished for our behavior but God stepped in and took that punishment for us. All he asks is you accept that. His plan is like nothing man would think up. Man would make it hard…God made it as easy as it could be. Accept his offer and live forever. I say, where do I sign up? Man’s idea would be to go on CNN. But God reveals the true state of a human heart by requiring child-like faith. Remember, they killed Christ when they saw him and all the great things he did. So seeing makes no difference because God knows who you are regardless of what you see.

The atheist search for “Proof” is not found in data, but in asking God. God transforms the mind…not data.

While I did read your whole post with great interest, what is in bold made me stop to think it over. I am interpreting your comment as when we sincerely ask God for help, He has the power to inspire us so that we use our own rational faculties. When we reach out to God as children, which is our creaturely status, God offers us the gift of Faith which perfects our human reasoning.

As I study human nature from the Catholic view, I am awed by the intellective powers and volition of the spiritual soul. In my humble opinion, the absolute proof that God exists needs to come from within the person who is looking for proof of God. The criteria is not the perfection of the proof; the criteria is that the proof works for that individual.

In Post 40
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=9039746&postcount=40
I presented a prime analogue to demonstrate how one needs to shift from material, visible proofs of God to understanding human nature as it is from the beginning of human history. I have not consistently followed through with my ideas because it seems as if there has to be a lot of preparation if one is going to demonstrate God’s existence from the viewpoint of human nature.

What follows are four points of a prime analogue. Number 1 is modified because it originally responded to a post.

1.What is important is the capability of a person to think beyond the natural environment. 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.

2.The second important thing is that the person, with the capability to swing a bat, also knows the difference between a baseball and a watermelon and therefore can choose to swing at either or not swing.

3.The third important thing is that the person, with the capability to swing a bat, with the ability to choose to swing or not, also knows that a baseball belongs in a game and that the watermelon belongs on a plate ready to be eaten.

4.The fourth important thing is that the person described above also knows that the baseball is not intended as nourishment and hopefully she or he will seek more appropriate food than a watermelon.

Please, what is your reaction to the above?

 

[RCCB]

When considering the very idea and nature of poof, one of the more interesting scriptural quotes is from Revelations 2:2

“You have put to the proof those who claimed to be apostles and are not, and found them false.”

Scripture is littered with warnings of false teaching. Anyone who has studied the Bible will be familiar with at least some of them. The non-canonical texts have a lot more. How could such warnings exist without knowing the means to know the difference between what is true and what is false. I believe that is the missing KEY to our understanding of God.

Among all the hundreds if not thousands of Christian denominations, each has an expectation that at the return of Christ, he will confirm the validity of their church. Even the RCC, deep within it’s theological wishful thinking expects God to reveal this ‘key’ for them to demonstrate that they are the original and only true church of Christ. But because everything is based on an all too human and fallible theological process of interpretations, who can be true is no one is false?

Because scripture is absolutely clear that false teaching exists, even widespread. How does God distinguish His own teaching from that of false teachers and interpreters? Presumably when a second coming takes place, Christ will provide the definitive proof necessary to sort whether theology is a valid human intellectual endeavor or just chasing after wind. Until then we just don’t know!

 

[grannymh]

When considering the very idea and nature of poof, one of the more interesting scriptural quotes is from Revelations 2:2

“You have put to the proof those who claimed to be apostles and are not, and found them false.”

Scripture is littered with warnings of false teaching. Anyone who has studied the Bible will be familiar with at least some of them. The non-canonical texts have a lot more. How could such warnings exist without knowing the means to know the difference between what is true and what is false. I believe that is the missing KEY to our understanding of God.

Among all the hundreds if not thousands of Christian denominations, each has an expectation that at the return of Christ, he will confirm the validity of their church. Even the RCC, deep within it’s theological wishful thinking expects God to reveal this ‘key’ for them to demonstrate that they are the original and only true church of Christ. But because everything is based on an all too human and fallible theological process of interpretations, who can be true is no one is false?

Because scripture is absolutely clear that false teaching exists, even widespread. How does God distinguish His own teaching from that of false teachers and interpreters? Presumably when a second coming takes place, Christ will provide the definitive proof necessary to sort whether theology is a valid human intellectual endeavor or just chasing after wind. Until then we just don’t know!

How?

One reads both the words and the context of the words used by Jesus Christ, especially where He says He is God and where He does what only God can do.

Do not cherry pick. If it is an unbreakable habit to cherry pick, then one needs to force herself or himself to read the entire chapter of the “chosen” verse and then the chapter before and the chapter after. Finally, one re-reads the chapter before the “chosen” verse chapter, the “chosen” verse chapter itself, and the chapter after in a true spirit of humble prayer for guidance.

Once one becomes familiar with the actions of Jesus Christ and the meanings of His many parables, then one can attempt the Gospel of John, Chapter Six. It is recommended to study only a few verses each time one is humbly open to the words of Jesus Christ, True God and True Man.

John’s Gospel, Chapters Ten to the end, should be read as the present time of Jesus Christ and then re-read in terms of what they say about the future, especially Chapter 14 where Jesus Christ addresses the needs of His Catholic Church on earth.

When one is totally familiar with the four Gospels and, more importantly, when one is inspired to pray (contact God) at various times while reading, then one can approach the rest of the New Testament in like manner.

 

[jochoa]

Among all the hundreds if not thousands of Christian denominations, each has an expectation that at the return of Christ, he will confirm the validity of their church. Even the RCC, deep within it’s theological wishful thinking expects God to reveal this ‘key’ for them to demonstrate that they are the original and only true church of Christ. But because everything is based on an all too human and fallible theological process of interpretations, who can be true is no one is false?

Excellent question, my friend! Here is the ‘key’ and reasoning for this ‘key’ that I have come to understand the Fullness of Truth (Roman Catholic Faith) regarding Jesus Christ’s Church. I hope you will consider it, and let me know if you come to the same understandings.

Since I want my relationships and myself to experience unbreakable peace and limitless happiness, and I want that experience to last as long as possible, I asked myself: What is required to establish an unbreakable peace, a potential for limitless happiness, and unstoppable energy?

From this, one should be able to reason that the requirements are: complete patience for unbreakable peace, kindness for any level of happiness, and a perfect motivational source for unstoppable energy.

At this point, I decided to give all credit to the author, as well as to those that have kept the message alive, of 1 Corinthians 13:4 and 13 because it is the first declaration that the greatest actions to master in life are patience and kindness. It turns out that the writer gives credit to God, and it is by the Saints and Martyrs that His Word has stayed alive. Therefore I give all glory to God and credit to His Saints and Martyrs.

Since I came to know 1 Corinthians 13:4 and 13 is Truth and the Holy Bible is from the same author, I decided to trust that the entirety of the Holy Bible is Truth. This, as well as recognizing other verses as Truth, led me to Matthew 16:18. Since the Papacy is the line of succession of Peter, then the gates of hell cannot overcome the building of His Church. Therefore, I know Roman Catholicism is the Fullness of Truth regarding Jesus Christ’s Church.

What I find interesting is that, if a person reasons all the requirements to achieving that goal for living, many of the truths of the Catholic Faith become apparent. Now it is when one reasons all the requirements to creating, from nothingness, free-willed and ignorant living beings to achieve that goal for living, that ALL the Truths of the Catholic Faith become apparent.

Thoughts?

 

[wcknight]

Miracles and supernatural… there are hundreds if not thousands from which to choose… here are a few of my favorites:

ST Padre Pio, lived with the stimagta for about 50 years, these were the wounds of Christ on his hands, feet, and side… doctors examined them on several occcasions, declaring that on one hand the wound went almost through his entire hand… he had them on the day he died, BUT on the day after he died, there was no visible trace of them at all, no scars at all.

ST. Anthony of Padua, worked so many miracles and was gathering so much attention, that his superior ordered him NOT to perform any more… so one day a man on a roof or scaffolding lost his balance and was about to fall, when St. Anthony saw this, he stopped the man in mid fall and ran off to his superior to get permission to save the man. When he got permission, he lowered the man to the ground.

Another for St Anthony - his father was accused of murder, and during his trial, St Anthony arrived (actually bi-located because he was miles away) and got the dead man to testify as to who the actual killer was. dead guy stayed dead, father acquitted, murderer arrested.

Various Eucharistic miracles:
therealpresence.org/eucharst/mir/lanciano.html

for example, host at Lanciano turns into human tissue- a priest who was beginning to lose faith was saying a mass and the host turns into actual human material.
There are many other example on the above web site. This happened many times, once turning into a whole human heart.

IF you want more, merely read about any of the great miracle workers or see the web site above.

As for any of these other religions claiming to be the one true religion. some do- and some don’t claim to have the true faith, and some claim God has appeared and some don’t.

Buddhists for example, Buddha never claimed he was God, and he did not perform any miracles. Miracle workers are not a part of their religious tradition and there has never been a great Buddhist miracle worker.

I believe the same is true for Shinto except they believe their emperor is a decendant of god.

Hindus have some ancient writings that claim one of their gods becoming human, but I have yet to hear of any hindu miralce workers, at least none in the last few hundred years or more.

Muslims claim to have the one true faith BUT where are their great miracle workers ???

And the same can be asked of any of these other beliefs. IF your faith is the one true faith, how can you prove that God is with you. God continuosly performed great miracles for the Hebrews, and now for the followers of Christ.

With Jesus and His followers, the blind see, the afflicted are healed, and demons are cast out. Just about every century there have been one or more great miracle workers. But the truly compelling thing about all of the great Catholic miracle workers, is that all were very holy, humble and honorable people.

 

[harinanga101]

Hey guys, I’m really just new here and I’ll just give my two cents on this matter.

Before everything, some “disclaimers.” I’m not claiming to give “absolute proof” of God’s existence since I don’t think that’s possible. Also, I’m not arguing specifically on why the Christian God is the real God - I think that’s a subject altogether different in itself.

I guess what I’m offering is just food for thought that might lead to the conclusion of God’s existence. (And again, I’m sorry if this was given before. Like I said, I’m just new).

Okay so I think, in a nutshell, one thing that might count as proof to God’s existence is man’s own awareness of his finitude.In other words, we know that we are finite beings, that we have our limits. But the fact that we know that we have limits is only because we are already, unconsciously, aware of what “unlimited” is. The paradox however is that we could not have gotten this “idea” of the unlimited because, precisely, we *are * limited. This basically is what the Ontological argument like that of St. Anselm and Descartes is, but I’ll elaborate a little more.

Let me give an example. When somebody asks us if we know everything, obviously we would answer “no.” Right? But by affirming that we do not know everything, we are affirming at the same time that there is an “everything” to be known -and that we know that there is. In other words, we have this idea or concept of everything or of the totality. Furthermore, we are able to understand this idea of everything once it is explained to us. But that’s exactly the problem. How could we have gotten this idea of everything if we don’t actually know everything? And how could we have even understood the idea?

I’ll try to say it another way. On the one hand there are things that we know. On the other hand there are things that we don’t know. Now what do you get when you add these two together? Well…everything. Everything that could possibly be known, everything that could possibly be. Because, strictly speaking, you either know something or you don’t. It is true that there are things that we are unsure of. But, in a way, we already know them because we know that we are unsure of them. In other words, we are not completely ignorant of them -they are already part of our thoughts.

Thus the things that we know and the things we don’t know are two parts that form a whole. It’s like they’re two halves of a circle. Now think about it. Imagine that you saw half a circle but at the same time imagine that you have never seen a whole circle or anything like it in your life. So you literally have no idea what a whole circle is. If you literally have no idea what a whole circle is, do you think that when you see the half-circle you will know that it is in fact a half-circle? Of course not! Because you will only know that a half-circle is indeed a half-circle if you have an idea of the whole circle. So when you see the half-circle, you won’t think it’s part of a whole circle and consequently you won’t be aware of another half. Is it starting to make sense? The half-circle that you see is the things that you know. The other half, the half that is missing, is the things that you don’t know. Now you have never seen the whole circle because you don’t know everything. But if that is the case, how come you are aware that there is another half to the one you’re looking at? How come you are aware that there is a missing half if you have never seen the whole circle and therefore do not know that the one your looking at is a half-circle in the first place? In other words, how is it that you are aware of, and can understand, the fact that there are things you don’t know?

I hope I didn’t sound confusing but that’s pretty much it. The paradox of the human being is that it knows that it doesn’t know everything. But the only way that it knows this is if it already had in its mind a vague idea of “the everything” or the whole. But there is no natural explanation it seems as to how he could have gotten this, unless it was given to him by that which indeed knows everything. And this omniscient being is what probably would be God. This can be supported by the fact that it is this very awareness of human beings that they don’t know everything, that there is something more to be known, that ultimately leads them to God. As Aristotle says in his Metaphysics, all human beings naturally have the desire to know and the ultimate object of this knowing is God.

Anyway that’s just my two cents. Sorry for the long post. Thanks!

 

[grannymh]

Please see post 138 for the beginnin
Before everything, some “disclaimers.” I’m not claiming to give “absolute proof” of God’s existence since I don’t think that’s possible. Also, I’m not arguing specifically on why the Christian God is the real God - I think that’s a subject altogether different in itself.

I guess what I’m offering is just food for thought that might lead to the conclusion of God’s existence. (And again, I’m sorry if this was given before. Like I said, I’m just new).

Okay so I think, in a nutshell, one thing that might count as proof to God’s existence is man’s own awareness of his finitude.In other words, we know that we are finite beings, that we have our limits. But the fact that we know that we have limits is only because we are already, unconsciously, aware of what “unlimited” is. The paradox however is that we could not have gotten this “idea” of the unlimited because, precisely, we *are *limited. This basically is what the Ontological argument like that of St. Anselm and Descartes is, but I’ll elaborate a little more.

Let me give an example. When somebody asks us if we know everything, obviously we would answer “no.” Right? But by affirming that we do not know everything, we are affirming at the same time that there is an “everything” to be known -and that we know that there is. In other words, we have this idea or concept of everything or of the totality. Furthermore, we are able to understand this idea of everything once it is explained to us. But that’s exactly the problem. How could we have gotten this idea of everything if we don’t actually know everything? And how could we have even understood the idea?

I’ll try to say it another way. On the one hand there are things that we know. On the other hand there are things that we don’t know. Now what do you get when you add these two together? Well…everything. Everything that could possibly be known, everything that could possibly be. Because, strictly speaking, you either know something or you don’t. It is true that there are things that we are unsure of. But, in a way, we already know them because we know that we are unsure of them. In other words, we are not completely ignorant of them -they are already part of our thoughts.

Thus the things that we know and the things we don’t know are two parts that form a whole. It’s like they’re two halves of a circle. Now think about it. Imagine that you saw half a circle but at the same time imagine that you have never seen a whole circle or anything like it in your life. So you literally have no idea what a whole circle is. If you literally have no idea what a whole circle is, do you think that when you see the half-circle you will know that it is in fact a half-circle? Of course not! Because you will only know that a half-circle is indeed a half-circle if you have an idea of the whole circle. So when you see the half-circle, you won’t think it’s part of a whole circle and consequently you won’t be aware of another half. Is it starting to make sense? The half-circle that you see is the things that you know. The other half, the half that is missing, is the things that you don’t know. Now you have never seen the whole circle because you don’t know everything. But if that is the case, how come you are aware that there is another half to the one you’re looking at? How come you are aware that there is a missing half if you have never seen the whole circle and therefore do not know that the one your looking at is a half-circle in the first place? In other words, how is it that you are aware of, and can understand, the fact that there are things you don’t know?

I hope I didn’t sound confusing but that’s pretty much it. The paradox of the human being is that it knows that it doesn’t know everything. But the only way that it knows this is if it already had in its mind a vague idea of “the everything” or the whole. But there is no natural explanation it seems as to how he could have gotten this, unless it was given to him by that which indeed knows everything. And this omniscient being is what probably would be God. This can be supported by the fact that it is this very awareness of human beings that they don’t know everything, that there is something more to be known, that ultimately leads them to God. As Aristotle says in his Metaphysics, all human beings naturally have the desire to know and the ultimate object of this knowing is God.

Anyway that’s just my two cents. Sorry for the long post. Thanks!

Your put into words what I have observed about human nature which is peerless in creation. I am tempted, out of my own curiosity, to put this in outline form. I also think that this could follow a modified scientific approach.

In my humble opinion, there are only three ways or methods that the Google Generation can demonstrate the existence of God.

1. analyzing one’s own nature. (subjective)
2. critiquing another person’s belief in God. (objective)
3. looking for the common denominator in *both *subjective *and *objective reasoning
   about God as a transcendent, Pure Sprit without restriction.

Blessings,
granny

“The shepherds sing; and shall I silent be?”
from the poem “Christmas” by George Herbert