Visionary7

Does God exist?

The question is yours for you to carefully consider and ponder.

Please produce constructive critiques and development insight in this thread about the question Does God exist?


><>

Philosoft

What does a "constructive critique" answer to a yes/no question look like? Why can't I just answer yes or no?

ziffel

Which god?

Oh and I hope you don't mind, but I fried up your little fish and ate it.

show_no_mercy

If by "god" you mean Lemmy Kilmister, then yes.

RAFH

Not absolutely certain god(s) do or don't exist since I have no evidence either way. Perhaps just being a concept in some people's minds constitutes existence. After all, my dreams exist, virtually everyone will grant me that because they themselves have had dreams, and they present absolutely no evidence of their being except to me, just like everybody else's dreams present evidence of their being only to their dreamer.

However, dreams are without effect in the real world. They can't be measured, though its possible to say one is in a mental state where it is believed dreaming occurs. But a dream can't move a pencil, unless the dreamer actuates that motion. A dream can't create a world, except in the dreamer's mind.

Whatever god(s) exist are likely to be similar, a phantasm of a being's mind. A phantasm that may seem real but can only have effect via the action of the being experiencing that phantasm.

God(s), as usually described, do not inhabit the natural world, neither they nor their effects (other than those effected by those experiencing them) can be measured in the natural worlds, not just because we don't have the knowledge or technology, but by definition. They are, by that same definition, supernatural. Thus they can have no effect in the natural world, again except via the action of their believers.

It has always been shown this is the case. In any number of ways. The primary way, and the one to which all the others effectively reduce to, is simply not being there, either in person or effect. The believers always have excuses for such, but at some level, they know these are just excuses. They may bury that knowledge because it exposes a painful issue, their mortality and ultimate meaninglessness. Everybody, even one who achieves global greatness, is eventually no more than a flower, a brief show of color that will eventually fade and rot. No more than a mountain that will eventually erode down to nothing, no more than a star that will eventually burn out its fuel.

But no one can display their god(s). They can make stories about them, they can carve statues, they can build temples, even empires, whatever, but they can't display their god(s), ever.

So, ultimately god(s) are irrelevant.

They are simply an excuse, the perfect excuse, for what we do. Always there for us because god(s) are in our minds.

Or not.

Ruiner

God is in my nose, which blows.

To say something exists you must be able to affirm it's existence. To affirm existence, one must be presented with evidence, either observable or logical or both, to determine such a thing exists or probably exists.

But lets get back to the start again - what is this something of which we are to affirm or deny existence? Which definition of god shall the doting defenders of logic play with this eve?


ETA: And if one exists, why not two or three? Why just one? But we'll cross that road when you define god and we affirm the definition is logical and sound and enough evidence points to a thing called god.

Weltall

Yes, the Invisible Pink Unicorn (pbuhhh) exists. I dare you to prove otherwise.

RAFH

Weltall, you should get that gas problem looked into, it could be damaging your esophagus.

Visionary7

Then you are legally free to answer Y/N? <?>

Visionary7

I point you to this ancient 'inscription', to the uknown god.

Why does this ancient inscription exist in the historic context of the narrative Gospels? (Acts of the Apostles) You mean to tell me that the apostles did not did their work and carry out their missions as Jesus commanded them to?