Existence is a remarkably low bar to clear. That we're even talking about it means it's already cleared that bar.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Does a god exist
- Thread starter We Never Know
- Start date
That is one viewpoint, @Quintessence . And unless I am mistaken (entirely possible) it comes with a certain understanding of meaning for the word "existence".
There are others, and they are relevant for the deities which are most often part of discussions of existence of same.
There are others, and they are relevant for the deities which are most often part of discussions of existence of same.
Yeah, most definitely. The OP didn't specify so I went inclusive rather than exclusive with ontological assumptions (that is, existence-as-concept or idea is still a form of existence and all gods easily clear that bar). Personally, even if the OP narrowed things up it'd still be a yes considering the things people deify include stuff that even the science study and claim demonstrably "exist" in a narrow, materialistic sense. Whether or not outsiders consider those things gods? An important question but in some respects irrelevant if one wishes to be at all respectful of other cultures. Quite obviously, the gods people worship exist to them. That's always been enough for me, but us polytheists are generally less concerned with "believing in" and "existing" whatnot than what people actually do with that in practice.
By "creator," are you picturing an intentional personage?
I'd say that rounds off to "no."
Obviously, I voted "no."
Do werewolves exist? I would vote "no," to that, too, because we can't find the tiniest trace of evidence for such a thing. The same is true of a powder-blue moose in Algonquin Park in Canada -- such a thing has never been seen, there is no fossilized evidence, there is no known way that a moose could develop fur of a powder-blue hue. So "no," there are no powder-blue moose in Algonquin -- or anywhere else, either.
Now, I have some idea about what a werewolf is supposed to be. Same thing with vampires like Count Dracula. So when you have definition for a thing, it is at least possible to set out upon a search for them.
But what, in the end, is the definition of "god?" Is it the omniscient, omnipotent, omnibenevolent, non-physical, "personal" being that most humans seem to suppose? If that were the case, then I think that it would not be a difficult problem to find some evidence for such a thing. This, unfortunately, has never been produced. Is it some other definition? Well, until somebody tells me what definition of "god" they would like me to consider the existence of, I can't proceed -- I'm kind of stuck with the triple-O god of the major Abrahamic reliigions that I'm familiar with.
Do werewolves exist? I would vote "no," to that, too, because we can't find the tiniest trace of evidence for such a thing. The same is true of a powder-blue moose in Algonquin Park in Canada -- such a thing has never been seen, there is no fossilized evidence, there is no known way that a moose could develop fur of a powder-blue hue. So "no," there are no powder-blue moose in Algonquin -- or anywhere else, either.
Now, I have some idea about what a werewolf is supposed to be. Same thing with vampires like Count Dracula. So when you have definition for a thing, it is at least possible to set out upon a search for them.
But what, in the end, is the definition of "god?" Is it the omniscient, omnipotent, omnibenevolent, non-physical, "personal" being that most humans seem to suppose? If that were the case, then I think that it would not be a difficult problem to find some evidence for such a thing. This, unfortunately, has never been produced. Is it some other definition? Well, until somebody tells me what definition of "god" they would like me to consider the existence of, I can't proceed -- I'm kind of stuck with the triple-O god of the major Abrahamic reliigions that I'm familiar with.
WalterTrull
Godfella
I’m struggling a bit with the concept. I know we see the creator through the creations. However, the creator must be inclusive of all the creations and envelop the universe. Sorting out intent there is a bit problematic. While having those attributes, definitely not a personage. I think maybe “What you see is what you get.” Hopefully, I’ll get a bit more light.
There are lots of things people call God that actually exist; the Sun, Nature, people as real as you and I, etc. etc.
InvestigateTruth
Well-Known Member
I am a Bahai, and I cannot say the word "exist" is necessarily applicable to God. Because "exist", denotes that there is a physical existence with a form, somewhere in the universe. If that's the question, I don't say God exist. But I say, God is Unknowable Essence. So I couldn't find an option to vote.
Heyo
Veteran Member
I think @We Never Know made it clear that he doesn't care which definition of "god" and "exists" you prefer. So I gave my definition (#4) and voted accordingly.
The poll result may be a bit skewed through bad questioning.
RestlessSoul
Well-Known Member
I know there is a God. I prefer to believe that The Creator reveals Himself to all humans who honestly seek Her. But I cannot know if that is so.
Some people seem totally sincere in their conviction that, for them, there is no God. But for me, God is as real as you are; and I do believe that you are real (and not a Boltzmann brain).
RestlessSoul
Well-Known Member
Perhaps. Or perhaps it just says more about those atheists; for all of whom, I presume you do not speak btw.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
Well, to me God is different for different cognitions: There is no way to God, there are many ways to many Gods and there is only one way to God.
I can do all 3 and even combine them.
It does not. But I expect that you knew that already.
Of course I don't.
Then again, I hardly need to.
RestlessSoul
Well-Known Member
Well, to me God is different for different cognitions: There is no way to God, there are many ways to many Gods and there is only one way to God.
I can do all 3 and even combine them.
But they all lead you either to God, or to the absence of God (and there is nothing more conspicuous than an absence we are aware of).
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
I treat absence differently than you. Peace.
RestlessSoul
Well-Known Member
If you proclaim that you are an atheist, that tells me something about you. It doesn’t tell me anything about God.
mikkel_the_dane
My own religion
All versions of God are not theistic.