If God existed how could it be proven?

[wellwisher]

In terms of knowing anything in life, one needs to be willing to learn the needed background, so the data used for proof, makes logical sense to you and can be used to independently reach the same conclusion.

For example, how can you prove to yourself that galaxies are so far away, with some galaxies billions of light years away? This observation may be true and well documented, but how can you prove it to yourself, without simply memorizing what others tell you, based on their prestige?

One way is you would need to go to collage, and learn all the math and science skills and theory, needed to analyze the raw data for yourself. This way you can independently draw the same conclusions. Too many people memorize what the Science Guy says, without actually understanding how that conclusion was reached with the raw data. Following herd instinct and allowing prestige to lead, is not the same as genuine understanding on your own.

The same is true of proof of God. The uneducated and cynical layman will not see the significance of tiny blips on the computer screen. However, often that is the type of proof used to signify that the galaxies are so far away. Experts in all fields can see tiny blips. The layman either memorizes or does not, but rarely choses the path of specialty education so they can see it for themselves. To see proof of God you need to learn about his habitat, so you can know how and where to see this very elusive phenomena.

 

[night912]

That is because you are.

That is your personal opinion

No, it's not @Mestemia's personal opinion because he never said that it was his personal opinion.

 

[McBell]

I never said that you said that I said I was making excuses for god. Stop obfuscating, everyone can see it.

rotflmao

Please quote me saying I am making excuses for God or stop saying that I am making excuses for God.

​

You even posted it in BOLD....

​

You said that I am making excuses for God. I denied that I am making excuses for God.
``````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````

You have said that “you are making excuses for God” and I have all this saved in a Word document so it is a simple copy/paste.
I am pointing out what you have done. NINE times you have accused me of making excuses for God. The proof is below.

1. Mestemia said:
No offense, but this merely comes off as nothing more than you making excuses for God....
#93 Mestemia, Yesterday at 10:55 PM

2 Mestemia said:
If so, I am wondering why you are the one listing excuses for god.

3. You present a long list of excuses for God.
I point out that you presented a long list of excuses for God.
You ask why God would need excuses
I said why indeed, yet here we are.

4. In fact, if God really is the God you claim God to be, why indeed would god need you to make excuses for him?

5. You present a long list of excuses for God.
#161 Mestemia, Today at 2:11 PM

Mestemia said:
How does that follow?
6. Your presenting excuses for god means YOU think god needs excuses.
My pointing it out in no way reveals my stance on the subject.

7. then why this list of excuses: #165 Mestemia, Today at 2:51 PM

8. Mestemia said:
Your list of excuses were presented in the post this post of yours is in reply to.

9. Your excusing your god through SoP does not change the excuses into not excuses.
#173 Mestemia, Today at 3:16 PM

Again...

And?

Please present when I said that I have not pointed out your making excuses for god....

I mean this is only what, the third, or fourth time I have FLAT OUT asked.....

And all you do is repeat the same old same old like you have some sort of point.
If you have some point, you will need to spell it out.

That is your personal opinion but that is irrelevant to the point -- You said that I am making excuses for God.

I have made no excuses for God, I offered explanations

I never said that you accused me of you claiming I was making excuses for God because I denied making excuses for God.

I never said that you denied that. Show me where I ever said that. I only said that you said that I am making excuses for God.

God needs no excuses because God makes no mistakes because God is infallible. Only humans need excuses and they make lots of excuses. One BIG mistake that make is when they fail to recognize the Messenger of God because they are namby pamby babies who want God to give them what they want, like petulant children. They reject God's Messengers so they do not deserve to know that God exists, and that is why they will never know.

Back to merely repeating the same old, same old.
Who is it you are trying to convince?

 

[Trailblazer]

i wouldn't know with 100% certainity, but it would be the best explanation

It would be one explanation but have you ever heard of UFOs?

 

[Trailblazer]

No, it's not @Mestemia's personal opinion because he never said that it was his personal opinion.

It is a bald assertion that I am making excuses for God unless it can be proven that God needs excuses.

 

[Trailblazer]

Yes, and that is why I asked you to provide that evidence, fruit or whatever. Where is it?

Ciao

- viole

The claims and the evidence that support those claims are listed in this post.

Questions for knowledgeable Bahai / followers of Baha'u'llah

 

[viole]

The claims and the evidence that support those claims are listed in this post.

Questions for knowledgeable Bahai / followers of Baha'u'llah

Be a gentleman and select one. I don't like to jump between fora. You can choose the one we prefer, and we will submit it to rational analysis.

Ciao

- viole

 

[Trailblazer]

By point tell me how we are "moving in that direction"?

Turn on the TV news and you will see all the changes taking place all over the world.
A new day is dawning and it has a cause. It all started in 1844.

What hath God Wrought? 24 May 1844

We live in the most remarkable of times. The transformation of the material conditions of humanity has a cause. Do we really believe that the human beings who came before us were incapable of what we see in the world today? Great civilizations have come before in history – yet none of them broke out of the same reality that has existed since the dawn of agriculture.

It is only in this time that humanity has passed into an entirely new reality. It has a cause. A cause larger than humanity itself.

In 1844, in Shiraz, the Bab, Baha’u’llah’s immediate forerunner, spoke these words:

The secret of the Day that is to come is now concealed. It can neither be divulged nor estimated. The newly born babe of that Day excels the wisest and most venerable men of this time, and the lowliest and most unlearned of that period shall surpass in understanding the most erudite and accomplished divines of this age.[1]

A short time before, on the other side of the planet on 24 May 1844, within a day of the Bab’s declaration of his mission, Samuel Morse, the inventor of the telegraph sent its first message from Washington to Baltimore. The message read as follows: What hath God Wrought? , citing a passage from the Bible.

 

[Trailblazer]

Be a gentleman and select one. I don't like to jump between fora. You can choose the one we prefer, and we will submit it to rational analysis.

Ciao

- viole

The claim or the evidence? How can I know what you would prefer and consider to be evidence?

 

[Trailblazer]

Evidence lacking. Will wait for better.

You will be waiting a long time, as forever is a long time.
God has never presented any other direct evidence of His existence except the Messengers.

 

[viole]

The claim or the evidence? How can I know what you would prefer and consider to be evidence?

Well, you have to start somewhere. If you asked me evidence of, say, relativity, I would not have your problems. Or is your evidence something that can be easily be confused for no evidence whatsoever? Or is it something like evidence of the paranormal? It vanishes when you submit it to logical analysis.

So, c'mon. It should not be too difficult. What is the most obvious evidence that your middle men spoke with God?

Ciao

- viole

 

[Trailblazer]

What does it even mean to "exist" if there is no detectability, no physical properties, not part of the material world...

ie, when it is without any detectable manifestation whatsoever?

What's the actual difference between such an entity and a non-existing one?

The actual difference is that one exists and the other one does not exist. Are there not parts if this universe that exist yet are undetectable?

Since so far this "god" is pretty much indistinguishable from non-existent things, I wouldn't have a clue how to answer any of these questions.

That is an honest response....
The only way we can know anything about God, including that He exists, is from the Manifestations of God, what i normally refer to as Messengers of God. It has always been this way throughout all of history.

 

[Trailblazer]

Well, you have to start somewhere. If you asked me evidence of, say, relativity, I would not have your problems. Or is your evidence something that can be easily be confused for no evidence whatsoever? Or is it something like evidence of the paranormal? It vanishes when you submit it to logical analysis.

So, c'mon. It should not be too difficult. What is the most obvious evidence that your middle men spoke with God?

Ciao

- viole

The most obvious evidence to me is The Works of Bahá'u'lláh.

 

[Truthseeker]

That holy man, Ṣádiq, 37 in his eulogy of the Cherubim, saith: “There stand a company of our fellow-Shí’ihs behind the Throne.” Divers and manifold are the interpretations of the words “behind the Throne.” In one sense, they indicate that no true Shí’ihs exist. Even as he hath said in another passage: “A true believer is likened unto the philosopher’s stone.” Addressing subsequently his listener, he saith: “Hast thou ever seen the philosopher’s stone?”

i just took a course on Shi'i Islam, so I know Sadiq is the 6th Imam.

 

[Link]

@viole , if you want to see God, just look at him and believe in what is front of you. Look at the sky/heavenly/inward kindgdom/light, and compare it to the darkness. The two companions of the journey, one from Satan and the other the Guiding King of your time, is something to be witnesses through looking inward and within.

You can smell/scent/see/taste God, it's easy, he created rivers/spiritual green light mountains/ways connected to your soul and they the guides and lanterns of guidance in the sky connected to this world. You can always look at the sky and you yourself have never been without it's light. The heart can analyze and so take your time, meditate, and see what you are connected to.

If you need to connect to nature, mountains, trees, spirits of animals, then do it too, they will all call you to the Guide and not try to take guidance for themselves. Try it, meet a native American, let them do a ritual and get you connected to the spiritual world and see the spirits in all things and ask the spirits in trees/mountains, etc, there who the Guide of the time is and ask them about who is the last Prophet, etc...

The journey for those who want to see God is short and quick.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

The actual difference is that one exists and the other one does not exist.

No, that's the claimed difference.

Are there not parts if this universe that exist yet are undetectable?

How would you know?

That is an honest response....
The only way we can know anything about God, including that He exists, is from the Manifestations of God,

You have excluded the option of detectable manifestation already.

what i normally refer to as Messengers of God. It has always been this way throughout all of history.

If that (people claiming stuff) counts as "manifestations", then all of the following should be considered to exist:
- alien abductions
- bigfoot
- sasquatch
- poltergeists
- dragons
- ...

Sorry, but what you are calling "messengers", are in reality just people who make claims.

 

[Trailblazer]

I'm saying that whatever God's "properties," if his existence were established, he would be counted among the things that physically exist.

God does not physically exist. God is Spirit

- if it's well-demonstrated that a thing exists, it's physical.
- if there isn't good evidence for a thing but people get deeply invested in it, it's "spiritual" or "supernatural."

There's nothing that, once established to be real, stays as "spiritual" or "supernatural."

But that does not mean that "spiritual" or "supernatural." do not exist.

 

[Trailblazer]

Apparently God created existence, or our world at least (material as far as I can tell), but cannot show up in such? Some limitation I would say - if one was to present said God as omni-all. That's one limitation scored.

God created the material existence but God is not a material being. God is spirit, so God cannot "show up." The only way God ever shows up is in His Manifestations, what I refer to as Messengers of God.

 

[Link]

Physical/material existence doesn't exist, only word/idea type existence, and dualism is irrational and impossible, because material and immaterial are defined to be opposites such that there is no relationship between the two, and so from God to everything, there is one light/spiritual existence. Material existence can't be witnessed, people assume their five senses define it, but if you reflect, these are ideas in your experience, none of them tell you what existence or reality is. The only direct existence you experience is spiritual, like your own self, like God, like Angels, etc... and you should think of your five senses and body as avatars in a video game, they don't tell you what existence really is though. That code is all hidden and known best by God and can be witnessed to some degree if we begin to listen to God's revelations.

Dualism has been proven to be impossible to me, either believe in God and light type existence or believe in material type existence and that you are a program generated by that, but don't combine the two. It doesn't make sense to do that. As far as I know, we witness our own souls existing and we haven't witnessed what material type existence can even possibly be let alone that it exists.

 

[Trailblazer]

I agree with @Mestemia

Whatever we call it, you certainly seem to be putting forward reasons why your God is indistinguishable from a God that doesn't exist.

He is, unless you look at His Manifestations.