Welcome, Guest: Join Nairaland / LOGIN! / Trending / Recent / New
Stats: 2,863,235 members, 6,869,706 topics. Date: Thursday, 19 May 2022 at 01:13 AM

My Argument For God's Existence - Religion - Nairaland

Nairaland Forum / Nairaland / General / Religion / My Argument For God's Existence (2080 Views)

My Argument For God's Existence. / Atheist, What Would You Consider Evidence Of God's Existence? / Seun, Finally I Want To Give You An Undeniable Proof For God's Existence. (2) (3) (4)

(1) (2) (3) (4) (Reply) (Go Down)

My Argument For God's Existence by NnennaG6(f): 11:08am On Jan 22, 2019
If we want to investigate the world scientifically, we don't just look around and form our own opinion, and take that as the truth. We gather objective data in as many ways as possible, to minimise human error, bias, superstition, etc. In this way we have formed valid theories about how the physical world works.


There is no scientific evidence that God exists. The mistake atheists make, is assuming that science has no blind spots.


Science has one natural, huge, critical blind spot; the personal nature of existence. Your whole life is lived from one perspective. All we really know in the end, is what our senses tell us in our personal lives. We may have amazing, valid, objective, peer reviewed and tested scientific theories, but you personally will never know about them until you read about them with your own two eyes. All knowledge you have ultimately only comes into your brain through the filter of your own personal perception. Your perception is your whole and only reality.


So the question is, is there knowledge that can ONLY be attained personally, that can't exist in scientific consensus? The answer is yes, and here is the simple proof; we cannot prove our own consciousness to others. Only YOU know if you are conscious and real. Ever joke with friends about "how do I know you're all not just figments of my imagination"? It's that principle; personal consciousness is simply impossible to prove scientifically. It is categorically personal; only ever known by YOU. Of course we infer and assume that others are conscious just like us. We see with our perceptions that the world around us looks and works as if everyone else is conscious. But it is an assumption; there is no actual evidence. For all you know, you could be the only conscious being in a dream world, or the matrix, or whatever else this strange reality could be.


So your own consciousness is something which is self-evident to you alone, and impossible to prove. You alone know it to be true, through your senses. Believing that others are conscious and see the world like you, is actually faith, because there is no evidence. But this faith makes us treat others fairly.


I have to tell you that knowing God is the same. You will never see a proof. I can't offer one, nobody can. You either see it for yourself in the world around you, and in your life, or you don't. I can't scientifically prove my consciousness to you, but I can describe it, and, if you know it too, you will 'get' it. So, I can only describe God to you, and maybe you won't get it, and maybe one day you will, through your own life experience.


God is the name for how everything is connected. I was actually an atheist for many years, and then my personal experience started to make me believe in fate. Fate is another name for God. Another is Nature; another is the Universe. The All, the Prime mover, Chaos, Determinism, and Cause and Effect are also synonyms for God. God cannot be proven in writing, He must be seen first hand, and you will see Him (or 'it') if you are observant and thoughtful about everything you see in your life.


Faith in God means something like; "well, in the vast expanse of possible realities I could be living, my life isn't so bad. I am unbelievably lucky to be here. Humans could have been abducted by carnivorous aliens 10,000 years ago, and I could be living in a factory farm on planet Lizard right now. The world could just be 20% more boring, or dangerous. There's no law of physics that says we have to be able to experience beauty or joy. Nuclear armageddon still hasn't happened; I don't have to live in a post apocalyptic cancerous wasteland." Faith in God is looking at the world and realising somehow, the Universe seems to like me overall. And, from this, we can have faith that it will be good to us in the future, if we are careful. Again, this can never be proved scientifically. It's down to your perception and your own relationship with reality.


God is cause and effect, or nature, so observing it and recognising patterns can give us rules for how to succeed in life (morals). It's impossible to prove rules of life scientifically, because the matrices of causes and effects are very complex, and isolating them changes them. Take a deadly sin; Greed. How would we go about testing the hypothesis that personal greed leads to bad personal consequences? It is outside science, unless we can observe thousands of people at all times for their whole lives. You can only know if that hypothesis is true or false by either observing it yourself, or faithfully believing the words of a person you deem wiser than you. Again, it is completely a case of personal perception and experience of reality.


There is much more that could be written, but basically approaching God from this perspective can explain what concepts like faith, sin (evolutionarily maladaptive action), and morality (adaptive action) actually mean. There is a good reason for calling 'it', "Him", which could fill another post this long. I wasn't raised as any faith and I was an atheist for a long while, so discovering this stuff on my own, kind of from first principles, took some time. But lo and behold, every teaching of every faith makes logical sense from this perspective, even if you don't understand why a teaching is professed, you can understand that maybe thousands of years of passed down life experience knows something about causes and effects that you don't yet.


I thank God that He found me, and now I feel awake to the patterns and cycles of reality. Again, it's outside of science. I'm not asking you believe me without evidence, I'm just showing you how to look at it and you can take it or leave it. Maybe you'll scoff at this now and in 5 years time, come to realise I was right. It's your personal life, it's your personal journey of learning, it's your reality, after all.


Note I am not making the argument from personal experience. I am not saying "I saw the light so I know God is real, that's the proof"- we all know that's a stupid argument. There is no proof or argument. I would call this the problem of personal consciousness- the scientific blind spot. All I can say is if you are thoughtful and observant of your reality, one day you will come to see God, and know Him, just like you know you are here, wherever here is.


My eyes tell me the mountains are beautiful, though I cannot prove it to the blind.

My nose tells me the smell of flowers, though I cannot tell it in words.

My ears tell me music is sweet, although I cannot see it.

My skin tells me when it is cold, though cold is relative.

My tongue tells me I love strawberries; though others may hate them.

My heart tells me there is a God, and my mind tells me there is a me.

Our perception is our whole reality. What can we trust but our senses?

5 Likes

Re: My Argument For God's Existence by Nobody: 11:19am On Jan 22, 2019
.
Re: My Argument For God's Existence by Nobody: 11:44am On Jan 22, 2019
NnennaG6:
The mistake atheists make, is assuming that science has no blind spots.
I'd be careful on generalizations. It's certainly not true of me.


NnennaG6:
Science has one natural, huge, critical blind spot; the personal nature of existence. Your whole life is lived from one perspective. All we really know in the end, is what our senses tell us in our personal lives. We may have amazing, valid, objective, peer reviewed and tested scientific theories, but you personally will never know about them until you read about them with your own two eyes. All knowledge you have ultimately only comes into your brain through the filter of your own personal perception. Your perception is your whole and only reality.
And you have the exact same issue. Except it's an even bigger blind spot since what I read on science has been backed up by reliable methods of testing and review... whereas faith is consistently unreliable.


NnennaG6:
So the question is, is there knowledge that can ONLY be attained personally, that can't exist in scientific consensus? The answer is yes, and here is the simple proof; we cannot prove our own consciousness to others. Only YOU know if you are conscious and real. Ever joke with friends about "how do I know you're all not just figments of my imagination"? It's that principle; personal consciousness is simply impossible to prove scientifically. It is categorically personal; only ever known by YOU. Of course we infer and assume that others are conscious just like us. We see with our perceptions that the world around us looks and works as if everyone else is conscious. But it is an assumption; there is no actual evidence. For all you know, you could be the only conscious being in a dream world, or the matrix, or whatever else this strange reality could be.
Hard solipsism. As big an issue for you as for me, since if you're going to play this game, then you cannot possibly have any reliable conclusion on God.


NnennaG6:
So your own consciousness is something which is self-evident to you alone, and impossible to prove. You alone know it to be true, through your senses. Believing that others are conscious and see the world like you, is actually faith, because there is no evidence. But this faith makes us treat others fairly.
If we reject hard solipsism, which most everyone does because it's unfalsifiable and impractical, then consciousness is easily testable. We can see memories form, for example.

And it's not faith. It's an axiom that we all accept. There's a distinction.

NnennaG6:
You will never see a proof. I can't offer one, nobody can. You either see it for yourself in the world around you, and in your life, or you don't. I can't scientifically prove my consciousness to you, but I can describe it, and, if you know it too, you will 'get it'
We can, in fact, point out several hallmarks of consciousness. But if you're looking for a consistent definition of God, then you won't find it. The two aren't a good analogy.

NnennaG6:
God is the name for how everything is connected. I was actually an atheist for many years, and then my personal experience started to make me believe in fate. Fate is another name for God. Another is Nature; another is the Universe. The All, the Prime mover, Chaos, Determinism, and Cause and Effect are also synonyms for God. God cannot be proven in writing, He must be seen first hand, and you will see Him (or 'it') if you are observant and thoughtful about everything you see in your life.
This is functionally useless to me. We already have words for all this stuff; why do I need to attach a word to all of it that has such baggage, particularly one that implies sentience with no evidence?

You're also asserting that if we die atheists, we weren't observant or thoughtful about everything in life. I disagree.


NnennaG6:
Faith in God means something like; "well, in the vast expanse of possible realities I could be living, my life isn't so bad. I am unbelievably lucky to be here. Humans could have been abducted by carnivorous aliens 10,000 years ago, and I could be living in a factory farm on planet Lizard right now. The world could just be 20% more boring, or dangerous. There's no law of physics that says we have to be able to experience beauty or joy. Nuclear armageddon still hasn't happened; I don't have to live in a post apocalyptic cancerous wasteland." Faith in God is looking at the world and realising somehow, the Universe seems to like me overall. And, from this, we can have faith that it will be good to us in the future, if we are careful. Again, this can never be proved scientifically. It's down to your perception and your own relationship with reality.
So you took the puddle analogy, in a way. "Look how good this life is when it could have been otherwise— there must be a God!" Maybe you're lucky. But look around the world right now and tell me everyone's got what you do.


NnennaG6:
God is cause and effect, or nature, so observing it and recognising patterns can give us rules for how to succeed in life (morals). It's impossible to prove rules of life scientifically, because the matrices of causes and effects are very complex, and isolating them changes them. Take a deadly sin; Greed. How would we go about testing the hypothesis that personal greed leads to bad personal consequences? It is outside science, unless we can observe thousands of people at all times for their whole lives. You can only know if that hypothesis is true or false by either observing it yourself, or faithfully believing the words of a person you deem wiser than you. Again, it is completely a case of personal perception and experience of reality.
I reject your definition of God as functionally useless and limited to our universe. I also reject the existence of sin until you prove it. Furthermore, you can demonstrate a phenomenon that we call greed.

NnennaG6:
Maybe you'll scoff at this now and in 5 years time, come to realise I was right. It's your personal life, it's your personal journey of learning, it's your reality, after all.
What would it take to convince you that you're wrong?

NnennaG6:
My nose tells me the smell of flowers, though I cannot tell it in words.
Tell that to authors.

NnennaG6:
My heart tells me there is a God, and my mind tells me there is a me.
My heart tells me there likely isn't. Now what?

Edit: I don't think your conception of God is consistent with most people.

Is it or is it not an entity with actual external existence? In what way is it distinguished from fantasy?

12 Likes 2 Shares

Re: My Argument For God's Existence by Nobody: 11:59am On Jan 22, 2019
It's a long read ....I like it...and a humble post too, not trying to shove an opinion down anyone's throat.

That was same thing I told an friend..."Science is man made, it's got a very huge blind spot"......Too bad the atheist are soon gonna arrive and all they have is a show of insulting prowess of other people's beliefs and opinion different from theirs.

Lets all assume there's God right now..I don't think the science we have now yet has the capability of proving God's existence..

If we can have so much faith believing life exists outside our planet yet we cant see it but somehow completely deny the existence of a design entity we clearly see......to me its just an unconscious huge pride in the heart of men, the fact that we can crack a few mechanism of how our world works has gotten to our heads making us feel like god.
I predict in a few years time man will tag itself the creator of the universe after attaining greater heights than we have now.....after all we did create planes, television, internet, phones and the other toys that makes us think there can't be any other creator

2 Likes

Re: My Argument For God's Existence by BlakKluKluxKlan(m): 12:09pm On Jan 22, 2019
I love this very much. I agree it is almost impossible to evidently prove to someone that God exists. However, this fact had been foreclosed by the word of God in 1 Cor. 2 v 14 -"But the natural man receiveth not the things of the spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned" (kjv).

Again, i came across the following verse that got me thinking about science and it's numerous blind spots -

Eccles 11 v 5 -"As thou knowest not what is the way of the spirit, [color=#000000][/color] nor how the bones do grow in the womb of her that is with child: even so thou knowest not the works of God who maketh all" (kjv).

Please has science proved convincingly how bones do grow during pregnancy ?
I need some enlightenment on this.

Finally, talking about scientific blind spots, i learnt that a foetus in a sitting position in the womb MUST, and can only be delivered, by CS once it goes beyond 7 months. Please is this medically and scientifically true ?

If true, then my faith in God has proved times without number that there is a God that can deliver such babies in the name of Jesus Christ through personal experiencies.

So God does exist but evidently proving it may be extremely difficult except by personal experiences.
Re: My Argument For God's Existence by BlakKluKluxKlan(m): 12:19pm On Jan 22, 2019
XxSabrinaxX:

I'd be careful on generalizations. It's certainly not true of me.



And you have the exact same issue. Except it's an even bigger blind spot since what I read on science has been backed up by reliable methods of testing and review... whereas faith is consistently unreliable.



Hard solipsism. As big an issue for you as for me, since if you're going to play this game, then you cannot possibly have any reliable conclusion on God.



If we reject hard solipsism, which most everyone does because it's unfalsifiable and impractical, then consciousness is easily testable. We can see memories form, for example.

And it's not faith. It's an axiom that we all accept. There's a distinction.


We can, in fact, point out several hallmarks of consciousness. But if you're looking for a consistent definition of God, then you won't find it. The two aren't a good analogy.


This is functionally useless to me. We already have words for all this stuff; why do I need to attach a word to all of it that has such baggage, particularly one that implies sentience with no evidence?

You're also asserting that if we die atheists, we weren't observant or thoughtful about everything in life. I disagree.



So you took the puddle analogy, in a way. "Look how good this life is when it could have been otherwise— there must be a God!" Maybe you're lucky. But look around the world right now and tell me everyone's got what you do.



I reject your definition of God as functionally useless and limited to our universe. I also reject the existence of sin until you prove it. Furthermore, you can demonstrate a phenomenon that we call greed.


What would it take to convince you that you're wrong?


Tell that to authors.


My heart tells me there likely isn't. Now what?

Edit: I don't think your conception of God is consistent with most people.

Is it or is it not an entity with actual external existence? In what way is it distinguished from fantasy?


The usual balderdash, litany of insults and display of atheistic arrogance.

1 Like

Re: My Argument For God's Existence by NnennaG6(f): 12:26pm On Jan 22, 2019
XxSabrinaxX:

I'd be careful on generalizations. It's certainly not true of me.



And you have the exact same issue. Except it's an even bigger blind spot since what I read on science has been backed up by reliable methods of testing and review... whereas faith is consistently unreliable.



Hard solipsism. As big an issue for you as for me, since if you're going to play this game, then you cannot possibly have any reliable conclusion on God.



If we reject hard solipsism, which most everyone does because it's unfalsifiable and impractical, then consciousness is easily testable. We can see memories form, for example.

And it's not faith. It's an axiom that we all accept. There's a distinction.


We can, in fact, point out several hallmarks of consciousness. But if you're looking for a consistent definition of God, then you won't find it. The two aren't a good analogy.


This is functionally useless to me. We already have words for all this stuff; why do I need to attach a word to all of it that has such baggage, particularly one that implies sentience with no evidence?

You're also asserting that if we die atheists, we weren't observant or thoughtful about everything in life. I disagree.



So you took the puddle analogy, in a way. "Look how good this life is when it could have been otherwise— there must be a God!" Maybe you're lucky. But look around the world right now and tell me everyone's got what you do.



I reject your definition of God as functionally useless and limited to our universe. I also reject the existence of sin until you prove it. Furthermore, you can demonstrate a phenomenon that we call greed.


What would it take to convince you that you're wrong?


Tell that to authors.


My heart tells me there likely isn't. Now what?

Edit: I don't think your conception of God is consistent with most people.

Is it or is it not an entity with actual external existence? In what way is it distinguished from fantasy?
Perhaps your conception of God is wrong, which is why you find it so easy to dismiss. The idea of a literal magical man in the sky is of course absurd. Do you know that's what average Theists mean when they say God? Because to me it seems, apart from the dogmatic literalists, that most are referring to the same thing as I am - fate, the universe, causes and effects that are so complex as to be mystical to us etc. What do you mean by external existence?


It's not fantasy because it's physically real. In the same way that entropy or time is physically real, even though it isn't a distinct 'entity' of matter or energy. God is a property of the universe that you have to notice personally.

1 Like

Re: My Argument For God's Existence by Nobody: 1:03pm On Jan 22, 2019
NnennaG6:

Perhaps your conception of God is wrong, which is why you find it so easy to dismiss.
The conception of God I have is the one people claim exists. Now, maybe yours is different, but I'd want to know why you think it's actually true.

NnennaG6:
Do you know that's what average Theists mean when they say God?
They generally mean an actual being.


NnennaG6:
Because to me it seems, apart from the dogmatic literalists, that most are referring to the same thing as I am - fate, the universe, causes and effects that are so complex as to be mystical to us etc. What do you mean by external existence?
I mean does it exist apart from you.

My emotions, for example, exist only within me. A dog, by contrast, has an external existence. I may be happy about my dog, but the dog itself is external to me.


NnennaG6:
It's not fantasy because it's physically real.
In what specific way?

NnennaG6:
In the same way that entropy or time is physically real,
Those are descriptions. So they are "physically real" in the sense that as a concept they describe something--that there was state A, now there is state B, and we call the difference "time" and the increase in disorder "entropy".

NnennaG6:
even though it isn't a distinct 'entity' of matter or energy. God is a property of the universe that you have to notice personally.
What is this property, though?

And are you saying that you do not believe that God has consciousness? Time and entropy sure don't.

Besides, if faith had a blind spot, how would you know?

2 Likes

Re: My Argument For God's Existence by plaetton: 1:13pm On Jan 22, 2019
1StopRudeness:
It's a long read ....I like it...and a humble post too, not trying to shove an opinion down anyone's throat.

That was same thing I told an friend..."Science is man made, it's got a very huge blind spot"......Too bad the atheist are soon gonna arrive and all they have is a show of insulting prowess of other people's beliefs and opinion different from theirs.

Lets all assume there's God right now..I don't think the science we have now yet has the capability of proving God's existence..

If we can have so much faith believing life exists outside our planet yet we cant see it but somehow completely deny the existence of a design entity we clearly see......to me its just an unconscious huge pride in the heart of men, the fact that we can crack a few mechanism of how our world works has gotten to our heads making us feel like god.
I predict in a few years time man will tag itself the creator of the universe after attaining greater heights than we have now.....after all we did create planes, television, internet, phones and the other toys that makes us think there can't be any other creator

Absolutely nonsense.

First of all, science is not a conclusion, but a series of questions and questionings, from one question to another.

Science has never claimed to answer all the nagging questions of existence, but continues to seek and ask.

To say that science has a blind spot because science cannot investigate personal experience is laughable, juvenile logic.

What are human experiences? Pain, joy, sadness or fear, or the sum of individual experiences?
And how does individual experiences prove or validate the existence of god ?

If prophet Elijah , for good example, tells us that God told him so and so in a dream or vision, so we shoukd simply accept it because science would be unable to prove whether Prophet Elijah had such an experience or not? And to you, this would be the so called blind spot of science ?
Laughable indeed.

The pre-eminence of any system is measured by the quality of its output. In this case, what has humanity gained over the past eons by listening to and following mad men and their dreams and visions, what you would call their personal experiences ?
Should I tell you ?

On the other hand, what has the scientific system bequeathed humankind just over the last 300yrs ? Should I also remind you?

12 Likes 2 Shares

Re: My Argument For God's Existence by plaetton: 1:22pm On Jan 22, 2019
1StopRudeness:
It's a long read ....I like it...and a humble post too, not trying to shove an opinion down anyone's throat.

That was same thing I told an friend..."Science is man made, it's got a very huge blind spot"......Too bad the atheist are soon gonna arrive and all they have is a show of insulting prowess of other people's beliefs and opinion different from theirs.

Lets all assume there's God right now..I don't think the science we have now yet has the capability of proving God's existence..

If we can have so much faith believing life exists outside our planet yet we cant see it but somehow completely deny the existence of a design entity we clearly see......to me its just an unconscious huge pride in the heart of men, the fact that we can crack a few mechanism of how our world works has gotten to our heads making us feel like god.
I predict in a few years time man will tag itself the creator of the universe after attaining greater heights than we have now.....after all we did create planes, television, internet, phones and the other toys that makes us think there can't be any other creator
There is no person of science that has " faith " that life exists outside our planet. What a person of science would say is that they are certain with various degrees of probability that conditions that support life here on earth would most likely repeat itself elsewhere in different parts of the vast universe of over 1 trillion trillion stars . It is a simply mathematical projection that does not require " faith" of any sort.
In fact, your bible, your holy book supposedly dictated by god, boldly claims that life exists outside of earth.

2 Likes 1 Share

Re: My Argument For God's Existence by Nobody: 1:43pm On Jan 22, 2019
plaetton:


Absolutely nonsense.

First of all, science is not a conclusion, but a series of questions and questionings, from one question to another.

Science has never claimed to answer all the nagging questions of existence, but continues to seek and ask.

To say that science has a blind spot because science cannot investigate personal experience is laughable, juvenile logic.

What are human experiences? Pain, joy, sadness or fear, or the sum of individual experiences?
And how does individual experiences prove or validate the existence of god ?

If prophet Elijah , for good example, tells us that God told him so and so in a dream or vision, so we shoukd simply accept it because science would be unable to prove whether Prophet Elijah had such an experience or not? And to you, this would be the so called blind spot of science ?
Laughable indeed.

The pre-eminence of any system is measured by the quality of its output. In this case, what has humanity gained over the past eons by listening to and following mad men and their dreams and visions, what you would call their personal experiences ?
Should I tell you ?

On the other hand, what has the scientific system bequeathed humankind just over the last 300yrs ? Should I also remind you?

You are quoting the wrong person by the way..but it's fine I understand the ecstacy u atheist get from insulting people and their opinions
U see where the problem lies...whenever they raise the God topic ....u atheist rush in to make mockery of the Jewish, chrsitain version of God..... Is it because u were born in homes where ur parents raised u in those beleifs.....
Re: My Argument For God's Existence by NnennaG6(f): 1:47pm On Jan 22, 2019
XxSabrinaxX:

The conception of God I have is the one people claim exists. Now, maybe yours is different, but I'd want to know why you think it's actually true.


They generally mean an actual being.



I mean does it exist apart from you.

My emotions, for example, exist only within me. A dog, by contrast, has an external existence. I may be happy about my dog, but the dog itself is external to me.



In what specific way?


Those are descriptions. So they are "physically real" in the sense that as a concept they describe something--that there was state A, now there is state B, and we call the difference "time" and the increase in disorder "entropy".


What is this property, though?

And are you saying that you do not believe that God has consciousness? Time and entropy sure don't.

Besides, if faith had a blind spot, how would you know?
I don't need faith to believe in God. I can see the fact of God all around me. It is not faith. It is observation. Do you need faith that you yourself are real, or do you just see it?


Faith is a different matter; faith is believing the future will be ok/ God will look after me, despite that not being certain. You can know God and not have faith.
Re: My Argument For God's Existence by Nobody: 1:55pm On Jan 22, 2019
NnennaG6:

I don't need faith to believe in God. I can see the fact of God all around me. It is not faith. It is observation. Do you need faith that you yourself are real, or do you just see it?


Faith is a different matter; faith is believing the future will be ok/ God will look after me, despite that not being certain. You can know God and not have faith.
If it is indeed a fact that you can see god all around you, why can you not demonstrate this fact? Why can't you point to it? Why can't you show it to me and the others here?

The reason why is because it is not a fact, you just wish it were.

4 Likes

Re: My Argument For God's Existence by Nobody: 1:57pm On Jan 22, 2019
plaetton:

There is person of science that has " faith " that life exists outside our planet. What a person of science would say is that they are certain with various degrees of probability that conditions that support life here on earth would most likely repeat itself elsewhere in different parts of the vast universe of over 1 trillion trillion stars . It is a simply mathematical projection that does not require " faith" of any sort.
In fact, your bible, your holy book supposedly dictated by god, boldly claims that life exists outside of earth.

It's a mathematical projection that if life is here, there has to be life somewhere else.?? Lol..there's another branch of science that tagged that statement of urs as fallacy.
If I call myself a scientist and I'm projecting that what I can't see exist because another exist somewhere, why am i negating the existence of the possibility a designer of a physically evident designed nature just becos I can't see it??
I hate to discuss the God factor becos atheist are one way traffic and christain haters....u don't respect people opinion....the funny thing is there are great scientist that beleive in the God factor....
Re: My Argument For God's Existence by NnennaG6(f): 2:00pm On Jan 22, 2019
XxSabrinaxX:

If it is indeed a fact that you can see god all around you, why can you not demonstrate this fact? Why can't you point to it? Why can't you show it to me and the others here?

The reason why is because it is not a fact, you just wish it were.
This whole post is the answer to that exact question. It specifically lies outside of science. Can you demonstrate that your red is the same as my red? Seeing God is an understanding.
Re: My Argument For God's Existence by Nobody: 2:04pm On Jan 22, 2019
NnennaG6:

I don't need faith to believe in God. I can see the fact of God all around me. It is not faith. It is observation. Do you need faith that you yourself are real, or do you just see it?


Faith is a different matter; faith is believing the future will be ok/ God will look after me, despite that not being certain. You can know God and not have faith.

They will never get it...they only see the God disscusion from the angle of a sky daddy monitoring their sins telling them not to fornicate or other form of control law...
It's funny that atheist claim they are observant that's why they say there's no God....but the more u observe and study nature u realise it couldn't have come from a an explosion and an unmappable, untaggable, unviewable, unmonitoribale theory that we all started as slimy bacteria..

1 Like

Re: My Argument For God's Existence by Nobody: 2:13pm On Jan 22, 2019
NnennaG6:

This whole post is the answer to that exact question.
I see no answers anywhere, just a bunch of incoherent statements.

NnennaG6:
It specifically lies outside of science.
Then it's not a fact.

NnennaG6:
Can you demonstrate that your red is the same as my red?
You understand that red isn't something subjective right?

Red has a certain frequency. It doesn't matter whether you see it or not. You can literally point a machine to something and it will tell you it's red. It's 400–484 THz.

What you're saying is that one can decide what a meter is based on what you feel it is. No, we know what a meter is, we know what a meter is as much as we know what red is. They're objective standards.

NnennaG6:
Seeing God is an understanding.
Odd, I see things with my eyes. Can you demonstrate this assertion?

Edit: Consider that your post only adds MORE questions instead of resolving them.

4 Likes

Re: My Argument For God's Existence by johnydon22(m): 2:18pm On Jan 22, 2019
NnennaG6:
If we want to investigate the world scientifically, we don't just look around and form our own opinion, and take that as the truth. We gather objective data in as many ways as possible, to minimise human error, bias, superstition, etc. In this way we have formed valid theories about how the physical world works.


There is no scientific evidence that God exists. The mistake atheists make, is assuming that science has no blind spots.


Science has one natural, huge, critical blind spot; the personal nature of existence. Your whole life is lived from one perspective. All we really know in the end, is what our senses tell us in our personal lives. We may have amazing, valid, objective, peer reviewed and tested scientific theories, but you personally will never know about them until you read about them with your own two eyes. All knowledge you have ultimately only comes into your brain through the filter of your own personal perception. Your perception is your whole and only reality.


So the question is, is there knowledge that can ONLY be attained personally, that can't exist in scientific consensus? The answer is yes, and here is the simple proof; we cannot prove our own consciousness to others. Only YOU know if you are conscious and real. Ever joke with friends about "how do I know you're all not just figments of my imagination"? It's that principle; personal consciousness is simply impossible to prove scientifically. It is categorically personal; only ever known by YOU. Of course we infer and assume that others are conscious just like us. We see with our perceptions that the world around us looks and works as if everyone else is conscious. But it is an assumption; there is no actual evidence. For all you know, you could be the only conscious being in a dream world, or the matrix, or whatever else this strange reality could be.


So your own consciousness is something which is self-evident to you alone, and impossible to prove. You alone know it to be true, through your senses. Believing that others are conscious and see the world like you, is actually faith, because there is no evidence. But this faith makes us treat others fairly.


I have to tell you that knowing God is the same. You will never see a proof. I can't offer one, nobody can. You either see it for yourself in the world around you, and in your life, or you don't. I can't scientifically prove my consciousness to you, but I can describe it, and, if you know it too, you will 'get' it. So, I can only describe God to you, and maybe you won't get it, and maybe one day you will, through your own life experience.


God is the name for how everything is connected. I was actually an atheist for many years, and then my personal experience started to make me believe in fate. Fate is another name for God. Another is Nature; another is the Universe. The All, the Prime mover, Chaos, Determinism, and Cause and Effect are also synonyms for God. God cannot be proven in writing, He must be seen first hand, and you will see Him (or 'it') if you are observant and thoughtful about everything you see in your life.


Faith in God means something like; "well, in the vast expanse of possible realities I could be living, my life isn't so bad. I am unbelievably lucky to be here. Humans could have been abducted by carnivorous aliens 10,000 years ago, and I could be living in a factory farm on planet Lizard right now. The world could just be 20% more boring, or dangerous. There's no law of physics that says we have to be able to experience beauty or joy. Nuclear armageddon still hasn't happened; I don't have to live in a post apocalyptic cancerous wasteland." Faith in God is looking at the world and realising somehow, the Universe seems to like me overall. And, from this, we can have faith that it will be good to us in the future, if we are careful. Again, this can never be proved scientifically. It's down to your perception and your own relationship with reality.


God is cause and effect, or nature, so observing it and recognising patterns can give us rules for how to succeed in life (morals). It's impossible to prove rules of life scientifically, because the matrices of causes and effects are very complex, and isolating them changes them. Take a deadly sin; Greed. How would we go about testing the hypothesis that personal greed leads to bad personal consequences? It is outside science, unless we can observe thousands of people at all times for their whole lives. You can only know if that hypothesis is true or false by either observing it yourself, or faithfully believing the words of a person you deem wiser than you. Again, it is completely a case of personal perception and experience of reality.


There is much more that could be written, but basically approaching God from this perspective can explain what concepts like faith, sin (evolutionarily maladaptive action), and morality (adaptive action) actually mean. There is a good reason for calling 'it', "Him", which could fill another post this long. I wasn't raised as any faith and I was an atheist for a long while, so discovering this stuff on my own, kind of from first principles, took some time. But lo and behold, every teaching of every faith makes logical sense from this perspective, even if you don't understand why a teaching is professed, you can understand that maybe thousands of years of passed down life experience knows something about causes and effects that you don't yet.


I thank God that He found me, and now I feel awake to the patterns and cycles of reality. Again, it's outside of science. I'm not asking you believe me without evidence, I'm just showing you how to look at it and you can take it or leave it. Maybe you'll scoff at this now and in 5 years time, come to realise I was right. It's your personal life, it's your personal journey of learning, it's your reality, after all.


Note I am not making the argument from personal experience. I am not saying "I saw the light so I know God is real, that's the proof"- we all know that's a stupid argument. There is no proof or argument. I would call this the problem of personal consciousness- the scientific blind spot. All I can say is if you are thoughtful and observant of your reality, one day you will come to see God, and know Him, just like you know you are here, wherever here is.


My eyes tell me the mountains are beautiful, though I cannot prove it to the blind.

My nose tells me the smell of flowers, though I cannot tell it in words.

My ears tell me music is sweet, although I cannot see it.

My skin tells me when it is cold, though cold is relative.

My tongue tells me I love strawberries; though others may hate them.

My heart tells me there is a God, and my mind tells me there is a me.

Our perception is our whole reality. What can we trust but our senses?

In a clear sense, you seem to be making an argument rather for a Spinoza concept of God and not an actual anthropomorphic theistic idea of God.

Though, sometime you tend to lean a bit to anthropomorphism which i can excuse by human description ability. We use terms like "the river wants to flow downhill" somehow anthropomorphizing water even though the context doesn't, so i'd take these descriptions as such.

Going over you argument, you refer to things like; Nature, chaos, determinism, universe, cause and effect and broadly chance as God. In that sense, yes God exists.

The universe obviously exist
cause and effect are observed universal models
everything is nature
chaos is an inherent part of existence
chance is mostly a determining factor.

Call these things God then there is God. call them with the conventional lingual connotations and they remain the same in essence. Universe, nature, cause and effect, chaos, chance or fate, they do not gain more intrinsic meaning by ascribing the word God to it.

To me, that is am ambiguous way to define God because it seems broadly an argument of language use other than definite definitions.

9 Likes 4 Shares

Re: My Argument For God's Existence by johnydon22(m): 2:22pm On Jan 22, 2019
NnennaG6:

Perhaps your conception of God is wrong, which is why you find it so easy to dismiss. The idea of a literal magical man in the sky is of course absurd. Do you know that's what average Theists mean when they say God? Because to me it seems, apart from the dogmatic literalists, that most are referring to the same thing as I am - fate, the universe, causes and effects that are so complex as to be mystical to us etc. What do you mean by external existence?


It's not fantasy because it's physically real. In the same way that entropy or time is physically real, even though it isn't a distinct 'entity' of matter or energy. God is a property of the universe that you have to notice personally.
No they are not referring to the same thing as you otherwise it won't be theism

1 Like

Re: My Argument For God's Existence by Nobody: 2:32pm On Jan 22, 2019
Topic of thread: My Argument For God's Existence
Moments later...
NnennaG6:
There is no proof or argument.
Lol. Have a good day, sis grin

4 Likes

Re: My Argument For God's Existence by plaetton: 2:42pm On Jan 22, 2019
1StopRudeness:


It's a mathematical projection that if life is here, there has to be life somewhere else.?? Lol..there's another branch of science that tagged that statement of urs as fallacy.
If I call myself a scientist and I'm projecting that what I can't see exist because another exist somewhere, why am i negating the existence of the possibility a designer of a physically evident designed nature just becos I can't see it??
I hate to discuss the God factor becos atheist are one way traffic and christain haters....u don't respect people opinion....the funny thing is there are great scientist that beleive in the God factor....
Well, there is no mathematical corollary to the existence of a supernatural creator. The supernatural creator is just wishful thinking, not even a projections. The supernatural creator is itself a self-contradictry term, for, the creator also need to have been created by , I suppose, another superior creator, and so on and on.

However, it is easy to project with confidence that if liquid water and oxygen occur in any one or a fraction of the trillion trillion planets in the universe, then biological and perhaps sentient life would probably exist elsewhere in the universe. No faith required.

2 Likes

Re: My Argument For God's Existence by plaetton: 2:51pm On Jan 22, 2019
1StopRudeness:


You are quoting the wrong person by the way..but it's fine I understand the ecstacy u atheist get from insulting people and their opinions
U see where the problem lies...whenever they raise the God topic ....u atheist rush in to make mockery of the Jewish, chrsitain version of God..... Is it because u were born in homes where ur parents raised u in those beleifs.....
The problem with God question is that theists open threads or come to threads to rehash silly, worn out illogical arguments, that are , at best, laughable.
It's hard to ignore when someone comes online to post their warped logic as a valid argument.

The fact is that there is no logically acceptable arguments for the existence of god, except Faith. Faith is what God rests upon. That's why religions are built upon the acceptance and preservation of FAITH.
You guys should accept your faith and be honest that you believe in the existence of God on faith.
Each time you come here prove the existence of God with juvenile logic, you will always fall flat on your face, and we will indeed flog you.
That is what we do here. Nothing personal.
grin

12 Likes 8 Shares

Re: My Argument For God's Existence by TheArranger(m): 3:06pm On Jan 22, 2019
Finally!! We get to see evidence of God from a theist!! Let's see what this is all about cheesy. Hopefully there's no logical fallacies and it's based on rock-solid evidence.
NnennaG6:
We gather objective data in as many ways as possible
Sounds good so far!

NnennaG6:
There is no scientific evidence that God exists.
Here we go again...

Evidence is objective information that supports an idea. In other words: You just did admit that you have nothing.

NnennaG6:
The mistake atheists make, is assuming that science has no blind spots.
Horrible strawman. You have no idea how we argue.

NnennaG6:
Your whole life is lived from one perspective.
...and science as a method is literally about eliminating the errors of subjective experience. You have no objective, scientific evidence so you are only left with fuzzy feelings and anecdotes.

Not a solid basis for a whole worldview.

NnennaG6:
Your perception is your whole and only reality.
That's a claim.

NnennaG6:
Believing that others are conscious and see the world like you, is actually faith, because there is no evidence.
Lmao. Please define evidence.


NnennaG6:
I have to tell you that knowing God is the same.
Confirmation bias.

NnennaG6:
God is the name for how everything is connected.
Word salad.

NnennaG6:
Faith in God is looking at the world and realising somehow, the Universe seems to like me overall.
..which is demonstrably bullshit.

NnennaG6:
God is cause and effect
God of the gaps.

NnennaG6:
approaching God from this perspective can explain what concepts like faith, sin (evolutionarily maladaptive action), and morality (adaptive action) actually mean.
Why do I need to explain a christian concept like "sin" if the whole basis of Christianity is (as you admit) based on not a single shred of evidence and just fuzzy emotions, guesswork and confirmation bias?

NnennaG6:
I thank God that He found me
No need to thank your invisible friend. Grow up, young lady.

NnennaG6:
My eyes tell me the mountains are beautiful, though I cannot prove it to the blind.
Wrong comparison, truth claims is not the same as subjective perception.

NnennaG6:
My nose tells me the smell of flowers, though I cannot tell it in words.
We can break down the chemistry of smells. Educate yourself.

NnennaG6:
My ears tell me music is sweet, although I cannot see it.
Again, wrong comparison.

NnennaG6:
My skin tells me when it is cold, though cold is relative.
That's why we have introduced objective measurements for temperature. Come on, now.

NnennaG6:
My tongue tells me I love strawberries; though others may hate them.
*sigh* Again, wrong comparison.

NnennaG6:
My heart tells me there is a God
Hearts do not speak. They pump blood. Don't justify your superstition with your circulatory system.

NnennaG6:
and my mind tells me there is a me.
*Yawn*

NnennaG6:
Our perception is our whole reality.
Oxymoron

NnennaG6:
What can we trust but our senses?
Easy. Repeatable, empirical, objective evidence. It's called science. Educate yourself.

9 Likes 3 Shares

Re: My Argument For God's Existence by Nobody: 3:48pm On Jan 22, 2019
plaetton:

The problem with God question is that theists open threads or come to threads to rehash silly, worn out illogical arguments, that are , at best, laughable.
It's hard to ignore when someone comes online to post their warped logic as a valid argument.

The fact is that there is no logically acceptable arguments for the existence of god, except Faith. Faith is what God rests upon. That's why religions are built upon the acceptance and preservation of FAITH.
You guys should accept your faith and be honest that you believe in the existence of God on faith.
Each time you come here prove the existence of God with juvenile logic, you will always fall flat on your face, and we will indeed flog you.
That is what we do here. Nothing personal.
grin

What branch of science did u study to disprove God's existence...?? Or u just one of the bandwagon riding mocking biblical doctrines and what u read online??..from the ops post ...do u even know what faith is outside the biblical context??
I've done an appreciable amount of study....I'm 100percent sure an entity designed the building blocks of what makes you and I up cos u need to see see the unwinding of the DNA helix.....it's a wonder I must say...is it God? Mayb, mayb not....it would be irrational to say nobody made it.it doesn't look like something nobody made
look......Science is really young, there have been different forms of knowledge long before the Bible came and science came. Its just irritating when u Nigerian atheist have no argument asides the biblical bashing.
let's not overflog this issue... If there are no great scientist like Isaac newton and the likes dead and alive who believe in the God factor I would have tagged science the problem.....science isn't the issue....it's a human thing. We all have the different level of what our mentality can accomodate......peace
Re: My Argument For God's Existence by vaxx: 4:06pm On Jan 22, 2019
plaetton:

The problem with God question is that theists open threads or come to threads to rehash silly, worn out illogical arguments, that are , at best, laughable.
It's hard to ignore when someone comes online to post their warped logic as a valid argument.
hoopps...A very biased and subjective conclusion.

The fact is that there is no logically acceptable arguments for the existence of god, except Faith. Faith is what God rests upon. That's why religions are built upon the acceptance and preservation of FAITH.
You guys should accept your faith and be honest that you believe in the existence of God on faith.
Each time you come here prove the existence of God with juvenile logic, you will always fall flat on your face, and we will indeed flog you.
That is what we do here. Nothing personal.
grin
Logic is limited, evidence is best acceptable. In the presence of evidence, logic humble.

The scientific method does not provide "absolute truth", it only provides a heuristic that is guaranteed to converge on the simplest understanding of reality at the level of accuracy you're interested in that doesn't obviously fail.



The first step in the scientific method is decidedly not “ask a question”. The first step is coming up to speed with the current knowledge base in a discipline. Then, after observing the workings of the world based on that state of knowledge, you can take the next step and conceive then hypothesize something new.

But notice what it takes to get there: you have to have a set of evidence and demonstrably reliable knowledge to start the process of proposing something new that’s testable.

Science demonstrates through evidence. Evidence is always incomplete, thus it can never provide proof. Ever. There is always a possibility that we're missing something.

Science can, however, disprove. In reality, disproving things is what science is all about.

Yet evidence is always subject to interpretation (and manipulation), so we must be diligent in demanding that any result can be replicated under different conditions.

If multiple lines of evidence were well and repeatedly tested with a strong effect size, not everyone would accept the best explanation is a god. So the conclusion is more complicated as you may think.

1 Like

Re: My Argument For God's Existence by vaxx: 5:48pm On Jan 22, 2019
TheArranger:


Easy. Repeatable, empirical, objective evidence. It's called science. Educate yourself.
This is where we run into problems between science and God. Replicating evidence that God may exist or not exist is only possible if we can share it. Is there any objective measures we can use?
Re: My Argument For God's Existence by NPComplete: 8:15pm On Jan 22, 2019
As somewhat of a deist, I had high hopes for this thread. Seemed like it will be a very logical argument in the beginning. But being in the 5th paragraph now, I have just realised it has failed to achieve the level of logic I was hoping for. The argument is rather crude.

Now I am discouraged from reading the whole thing. **sigh**

Let me try and go through the whole thing and see whether the OP finds its footing.

EDIT: In the end, after a bit of missteps, the OP circles back to the God of Spinoza. Which is very similar to what I believe in. Such a concept of God is hard to prove and I don't think a God like that cares to be proven either. So it seems we have only arrived at the same spot we were before the OP created this thread.

2 Likes

Re: My Argument For God's Existence by NPComplete: 8:27pm On Jan 22, 2019
BlakKluKluxKlan:



The usual balderdash, litany of insults and display of atheistic arrogance.

The usual petulance, acute lack of comprehension and display of religious ignorance and self-deprecation.

Pray, clown, point out where the insults are in her post. Or the display of arrogance you sensed. Failing that just admit u are overwhelmed by the quality of the counter arguments the lady put forth and decided ad hominem was your best recourse.

7 Likes 1 Share

Re: My Argument For God's Existence by LordReed(m): 8:49pm On Jan 22, 2019
NnennaG6:
Faith in God is looking at the world and realising somehow, the Universe seems to like me overall.

After I rejected faith in gods for lack of evidence, this was were my mind went. To this "The Secret" type of the universe responds to you thinking but thankfully I stopped myself when I realised that once again I was falling into the trap of magic thinking because I "felt" I needed to preserve those so called "spirituality".

FACT: The universe don't give two bits about you or anything because the universe cannot! It simple is, you are imbuing it with purpose and will because you have them and your intuition leads you to assume the universe must have them too.

1 Like

Re: My Argument For God's Existence by LordReed(m): 8:52pm On Jan 22, 2019
NPComplete:
As somewhat of a deist, I had high hopes for this thread. Seemed like it will be a very logical argument in the beginning. But being in the 5th paragraph now, I have just realised it has failed to achieve the level of logic I was hoping for. The argument is rather crude.

Now I am discouraged from reading the whole thing. **sigh**

Let me try and go through the whole thing and see whether the OP finds its footing.

EDIT: In the end, after a bit of missteps, the OP circles back to the God of Spinoza. Which is very similar to what I believe in. Such a concept of God is hard to prove and I don't think a God like that cares to be proven either. So it seems we have only arrived at the same spot we were before the OP created this thread.

Can you briefly state why you you think such a deity exists? I am interested in your thoughts.
Re: My Argument For God's Existence by NnennaG6(f): 8:59pm On Jan 22, 2019
@XxSabrinaxX, TheArranger, LordReed & plaetton
Bacteria live inside us having no idea of humans. And we live inside a galaxy having no idea that there might be something extraordinarily bigger than us. And yes, of course we think bacteria just don't have mental faculties to understand our existence. In facts, we just might not have mental faculties to understand God's existence. Fractal worlds.
There's a lot of talk here, but I think people (on both sides) need to remember this: science searches to answer how, not why. You can easily believe in both God and science because they are answering two fundementally different questions.
Re: My Argument For God's Existence by NPComplete: 8:59pm On Jan 22, 2019
LordReed:


Can you briefly state why you you think such a deity exists? I am interested in your thoughts.

I have said it before here. I have no logical reason why I believe such a thing. I am just unable to believe there is no God. The world has more meaning to me this way. Whether that God is the universe itself or not is what I don't know. And, like Cicero said, I am not ashamed to admit that I am ignorant of the things I do not know.

But what I know for sure is that that God doesn't care whether u believe in him or not. And he sure as hell aint any Abrahamic god. As far as the evidence and what I can prove can show, that's what I believe.

5 Likes 1 Share

(1) (2) (3) (4) (Reply)

Where Is Heaven? / Anglican Church Bans Ogboni Regalia / Halleluyah! Converted Some Of My Family To Atheism On NL! Share Your Testimonies

(Go Up)

Sections: politics (1) business autos (1) jobs (1) career education (1) romance computers phones travel sports fashion health
religion celebs tv-movies music-radio literature webmasters programming techmarket

Links: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10)

Nairaland - Copyright © 2005 - 2022 Oluwaseun Osewa. All rights reserved. See How To Advertise. 525
Disclaimer: Every Nairaland member is solely responsible for anything that he/she posts or uploads on Nairaland.