If God existed how could it be proven?

[Trailblazer]

If God existed, could we prove it? How could we prove it?

How could we prove that God exists if God is in hiding, undetectable by humans?

How could we prove God exists if God is not in the material world and has no physical properties?

Since God insists on hiding, it makes more sense to me that God should provide the evidence or proof, especially if God wants people to believe that He exists.

But how could God provide evidence or proof that He exists?

If God does not provide any evidence or proof why should we believe that God exists? How would it be fair for God to expect us to believe with no evidence or proof?

If God existed, what would God do to prove it? How could God prove that He exists and still remain in hiding?

Atheists, if God existed what would you expect God to do to prove that He exists? What would be adequate proof for you to believe that God exists? Would you expect absolute proof of would you accept evidence?

 

[an anarchist]

If God existed, could we prove it? How could we prove it?

How could we prove that God exists if God is in hiding, undetectable by humans?

How could we prove God exists if God is not in the material world and has no physical properties?

Since God insists on hiding, it makes more sense to me that God should provide the evidence or proof, especially if God wants people to believe that He exists.

But how could God provide evidence or proof that He exists?

If God does not provide any evidence or proof why should we believe that God exists? How would it be fair for God to expect us to believe with no evidence or proof?

If God existed, what would God do to prove it? How could God prove that He exists and still remain in hiding?

Atheists, if God existed what would you expect God to do to prove that He exists? What would be adequate proof for you to believe that God exists? Would you expect absolute proof of would you accept evidence?

Ancient Indian tradition had developed a sophisticated system of epistemology called pramanas. Epistemology is the theory of knowledge. Epistemology attempts to prove God through logic alone.
I made a thread a little while back asking atheists if epistemology would ever provide satisfactory proof of God’s existence. Like, can one prove God through logic alone. The general consensus was no, as they understandably would prefer material evidence provided by natural science.
A pramana is a legitimate means to attain knowledge. Overall, their were six theorized different pramanas. The Nyaya Indian philosophy recognized four of these as legitimate means to attain knowledge I.e. prove God. I’ll reference this school of thought because they had the most developed school of epistemology from among the differing Indian philosophies.
the four valid means of attaining knowledge are:
1. Word/testimony from reliable sources
2. Perception
3. Inference
4. Comparison

1. Word and testimony as a valid means to attain knowledge is something that an atheist would never accept at an ideological level (I believe, I’m not atheist myself). The Hindus used this as argument because they believed that their very first sages from the most ancient times dived deep into meditation. When they were in this deep meditation, they were in direct contact with Brahman, and received true knowledge directly from Brahaman. This knowledge is what is passed down in ancient Vedic tradition. A Christian could use this argument, saying that the Bible proves God itself because the Bible says that God is real. This is a valid argument because the Bible is a reliable source.

I’ll discuss the other ones later on this thread, cooking myself some eggs

 

[stvdv]

If God existed, could we prove it?

God is Omniscientpresent (everywhere)

Kind of hard to miss Him, don't you think?

Note: Thank you @RabbiO for the correction; indeed I meant(corrected it to) Omnipresent

 

[Trailblazer]

I made a thread a little while back asking atheists if epistemology would ever provide satisfactory proof of God’s existence. Like, can one prove God through logic alone. The general consensus was no, as they understandably would prefer material evidence provided by natural science.

But if atheists want to say they are logical they would have to realize that what is not natural cannot be proven by natural science, and since God is not natural..... I figured this out all by myself with logical reasoning, I never read what anyone else wrote. I don't have much time to read.

I believe I know most of what I need to know through the Revelation of Baha'u'llah but the other religions and philosophies also have truth because truth is one. I spent about 20 years in college accruing several degrees so after that I decided it was time to try to so something besides studying, and then I discovered that I could interact with various people and learn by reading on forums, so I am killing two birds with one stone. I never want to stop learning, there is so much to learn, but I need to balance that with my desire to interact with people.

I’ll discuss the other ones later on this thread, cooking myself some eggs

That sounds like a good idea. I am going to have breakfast food if my husband ever gets up. He stays up all night and sleeps most of the day.

 

[Trailblazer]

God is omniscient (everywhere)

Kind of hard to miss Him, don't you think?

I dunno, I don't see Him anywhere.
I think God is easy to miss unless you know where to look.

 

[osgart]

Send messengers?

God has no limits other than logical impossibilities.

God only has to make known to our senses, or the intellect. And the senses and intellect are not always reliable.

Existence is a fight to know anything reliably. Humans are finite beings. The onus is on God.

 

[WalterTrull]

We are the proof.

 

[stvdv]

I dunno, I don't see Him anywhere.
I think God is easy to miss unless you know where to look.

"Where to look" is not the issue here

 

[MikeF]

If God existed, could we prove it? How could we prove it?

How could we prove that God exists if God is in hiding, undetectable by humans?

How could we prove God exists if God is not in the material world and has no physical properties?

Since God insists on hiding, it makes more sense to me that God should provide the evidence or proof, especially if God wants people to believe that He exists.

But how could God provide evidence or proof that He exists?

If God does not provide any evidence or proof why should we believe that God exists? How would it be fair for God to expect us to believe with no evidence or proof?

If God existed, what would God do to prove it? How could God prove that He exists and still remain in hiding?

Atheists, if God existed what would you expect God to do to prove that He exists? What would be adequate proof for you to believe that God exists? Would you expect absolute proof of would you accept evidence?

It cannot be proven. By the parameters you have set, an entity that is undetectable, with no material or physical properties, is by definition, imaginary, not real or existent, not part of reality.

Since the entity is imaginary, you cannot attest to any properties it may have other than imaginary ones.

 

[Nimos]

Atheists, if God existed what would you expect God to do to prove that He exists? What would be adequate proof for you to believe that God exists? Would you expect absolute proof of would you accept evidence?

In regards to a God providing proofs, I would expect them to be absolute.

God himself would know how to prove himself and I wouldn't expect it to be very difficult for him either, to be honest.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

If God existed, could we prove it? How could we prove it?

Ghostbusters?

How could we prove that God exists if God is in hiding, undetectable by humans?

Couldn't. Same with really shy yet powerful pixies.

How could we prove God exists if God is not in the material world and has no physical properties?

Bread crumbs.

Since God insists on hiding, ...

Yet another would-be guru who claims to understand God. We are truly blessed.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Atheists, if God existed what would you expect God to do to prove that He exists? What would be adequate proof for you to believe that God exists? Would you expect absolute proof of would you accept evidence?

My questions are

1. What is the definition of god you're referring to?

A deity...like a ghost?

If so, it would have to be so extreneous and distinct and can speak for itself whose gid it is

2. An experience or spiritual awakening?

A lot of people experience this but not all attribute it to God. I'm not sure if the need for an agency would invalidate the god-experience.

I haven't had a spiritual awakening. Just spirks of realizations here and there. If I told no one I wasn't a believer they'd think it was God..

God would need to be so distinct that if I asked a Hindu, bahai, Christian, pagan their Human experience would be distinct to their individual religions I would know without knowing their individual religions.

I'm not sure how you can separate god from experience and culture....atheist can find and the God-experience.

But you're speaking if it as a being or ghost. Do you mean that?

Maybe use another word for the same concept...

In my opinion, the question should be what is your profound experience that changed your life and world view?

To whom or what are you grateful for to be alive?
What are your values you can't part with at death?
What do you mean by love?
What is your gid experience?



Rhetorical questions above.

What god are you speaking of that I would know what I experience is specific to the god you're referring to?

 

[Trailblazer]

1. Word and testimony as a valid means to attain knowledge is something that an atheist would never accept at an ideological level (I believe, I’m not atheist myself). The Hindus used this as argument because they believed that their very first sages from the most ancient times dived deep into meditation. When they were in this deep meditation, they were in direct contact with Brahman, and received true knowledge directly from Brahaman. This knowledge is what is passed down in ancient Vedic tradition. A Christian could use this argument, saying that the Bible proves God itself because the Bible says that God is real. This is a valid argument because the Bible is a reliable source.

Thanks for sharing that. I did not know that about Hinduism as I don't know much about Hinduism. I do not know what Brahman is but I do not believe that God communicates directly to ordinary human beings but rather only to what I refer to as Messengers of God or Prophets, what Baha'is also refer to as Manifestations of God.

I think the Bible has certain problems owing to how it was written and compiled but nevertheless it is reliable source of Divine guidance and salvation, and can be rightly regarded as a sacred and holy book.

One authoritative Baha'i position on the Bible is as follows, and this could also be applied to other Holy Books:

The Bahá'ís believe what is in the Bible to be true in substance. This does not mean that every word recorded in that Book is to be taken literally and treated as the authentic saying of a Prophet....

The Bahá'ís believe that God's Revelation is under His care and protection and that the essence, or essential elements, of what His Manifestations intended to convey has been recorded and preserved in Their Holy Books. However, as the sayings of the ancient Prophets were written down some time later, we cannot categorically state, as we do in the case of the Writings of Bahá'u'lláh, that the words and phrases attributed to Them are Their exact words
(9 August 1984 to an individual believer)

The Bible: Extracts on the Old and New Testaments
(From letters written on behalf of the Universal House of Justice)

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Ghostbusters

I was thinking just that

 

[osgart]

Irrefutable truth! The kind where mental gymnastics couldn't avoid knowing God's existence.

Or maybe God isn't in to truth.

Why should one person be privileged over another just to know that God exists? It should be so simple anyone can understand it and know.

 

[Trailblazer]

Bread crumbs.

I believe that is true. We can only know God by the bread crumbs left behind by the Prophets and Messengers of God.

Yet another would-be guru who claims to understand God. We are truly blessed.

I don't understand God, but if God is not hiding then God must be visible. I don't see God anywhere, do you?

 

[Heyo]

If God existed, could we prove it? How could we prove it?

How could we prove that God exists if God is in hiding, undetectable by humans?

How could we prove God exists if God is not in the material world and has no physical properties?

Since God insists on hiding, it makes more sense to me that God should provide the evidence or proof, especially if God wants people to believe that He exists.

But how could God provide evidence or proof that He exists?

If God does not provide any evidence or proof why should we believe that God exists? How would it be fair for God to expect us to believe with no evidence or proof?

If God existed, what would God do to prove it? How could God prove that He exists and still remain in hiding?

Atheists, if God existed what would you expect God to do to prove that He exists? What would be adequate proof for you to believe that God exists? Would you expect absolute proof of would you accept evidence?

The real problem in finding god is that nobody knows what a god is. If you don't know what you're looking for, it is very hard to find it.
If it is real, there should be physical evidence. The method to look for it would be science. If it isn't real it depends on what kind of unreal it is. You could find it by reading if it is a character in a book, like Zeus or YHVH. It could be a legal construct and its existence would rely on social consensus.
God is a very odd thing. Usually we find something and then give a name to it. God is one of those thing that has been given a name (or category) and is now in search of a meaning.

 

[Wildswanderer]

But how could God provide evidence or proof that He exists?

He could visit Earth as a man and gather followers.

 

[osgart]

I believe that is true. We can only know God by the bread crumbs left behind by the Prophets and Messengers of God.

I don't understand God, but if God is not hiding then God must be visible. I don't see God anywhere, do you?

Bread crumbs, are we all that bad that God would only leave us bread crumbs?

Come to think of it humanity is dangerous; Artificial intelligence, and nuclear weapons. I suppose God should be careful with humans. Humans are a destructive force.

 

[Trailblazer]

Send messengers?

God has no limits other than logical impossibilities.

God only has to make known to our senses, or the intellect. And the senses and intellect are not always reliable.

Existence is a fight to know anything reliably. Humans are finite beings. The onus is on God.

God does not actually "send" Messengers,. I believe that their souls come from the heaven of the will of God and then they are born in this world.

I do not believe that God is subject to human-devised logic although God might have a logic if His own.

I agree that the onus is on God, but after God has stepped up to bat and hit the ball, then the onus is on humans to catch the ball, which is the Messenger sent by God. We have to rely upon our intellect even though it is imperfect, but we also have to rely upon God who is perfect. That involves tapping into something that is beyond intellect.

“Know then: that which is in the hands of people, that which they believe, is liable to error. For, in proving or disproving a thing, if a proof is brought forward which is taken from the evidence of our senses, this method, as has become evident, is not perfect; if the proofs are intellectual, the same is true; or if they are traditional, such proofs also are not perfect. Therefore, there is no standard in the hands of people upon which we can rely.

But the bounty of the Holy Spirit gives the true method of comprehension which is infallible and indubitable. This is through the help of the Holy Spirit which comes to man, and this is the condition in which certainty can alone be attained.”
Some Answered Questions, pp. 298-299

Read more: 83: THE FOUR METHODS OF ACQUIRING KNOWLEDGE