I think the question is actually "Why should I care if a God exists?" A God doesn't exist in reality so why should I care if one exists metaphysically...other than hellfire and damnation and other metaphysically unfalsifible claims?
Sure, belief in God exist. I think everyone agrees on that. What kind of truths do you mean it postulates?
Oh, I don't know, He's just the Creator and Master of the universe, and you will eventually return to Him. But yeah, who cares?
But you essentially said that secular humanists are proof for secular humanism. It is rooted in science and human reason. It is a system based on these truths. - - - Updated - - - No, I'm arguing that He is more than just a being.
So much false dichotomy and other fallacy. Prove freedom exists ? Are you serious ? Freedom is a relative term. Compared to someone who is locked in a cage folks who are not locked in a cage have more freedom. Freedom is thus a provable and real thing. There is no such proof for God.
This is actually quite interesting. If I understand you, you are saying that God is a concept, not an objective phenomenon. For instance, we can say Mars exists and point to various items of physical evidence. But we can't say that ideas exist in an objective sense. If an asteroid hits tomorrow and destroys mankind, all his ideas would vanish. There would be no freedom or Communism. But Mars would still be there. So is God an objective entitiy, or just a concept?
And you are once again in the realm of needing proof. Secular humanism and freedom are purely concepts. They are not anthropomorphic at all nor do their adherents claim them to be. If you are going to claim God is something more than solely a concept, then you should be able to provide proof.
I take it from that comment that God is a being but not solely.....if so would there not be some level of proof existing for the being part?
I'd argue that He is both. Ergo, you can't readily dismiss Him on the grounds that there is of a lack of evidence for His existence. Submitting to God is realizing that He is the superior truth out of all other truths (Marxism or Western Liberalism and so forth).
We know the concept exists, true. But the existence of the concept does not necessarily imply anything about its existence in objective reality. This would be true of any concept whose objective referent is not known, is this not correct? I suspect the 'realizing' you speak of can never occur through intellectual argument or scientific investigation. I guess I am as guilty as anyone else, but making arguments for or against the existence of god is a futile activity.
Circumstances. Every human on this earth bases his outlook and perception of life through a particularly ideology- some are communists, others are nationalists, etc.... All these people are persuaded by the various truths found in their respective ideologies. Evidence of anything is not considered here. The only thing that matters is that these concepts and ideas appeal to them for the soundness and rationale they find in them. Believing in God isn't about believing that some bearded guy in the sky is calling all the shots. It is in realizing that He is the superior Truth.
The fact that you are claiming it is a being at all is why you are being asked about proof. NO ONE disputes that the concept of god exists. In fact thousands if not millions of concepts of god exist.
Sure, but this assumes that there is only one reality. Indeed. It can certainly occur through intellectual argument. It is about proving that God is the superior truth, rather than proving that He exists. The former is essential, the latter is a luxury.
Well to me God is the nature of life. So its very easy for me to prove to anyone without any doubt what so ever that God is very real and everywhere. Good health to you.
I say the fact that secular humanists exist is proof that secular humanism exists, that has no bearing on whether it is true. I asked you explicitly if you were asking for proof of it existing (which both secular humanism and religion does) or whether it is true. You didn't answer clearly, so I gave both. Well, when science or reason is available, there is no reason not to use it, right? Are there any truths you refer to which you disagree with?
This thread was never about physical proof of God. Only atheists ask for proof of something they know they aren't going to get. I wonder why..... - - - Updated - - - So what? Point is that God is the superior concept, regardless of how many gods have existed.
So why is the fact that believers in God exist not proof that God exists? (It just so happens that God and Truth are one and the same. They have to be.) I don't agree that reason and science is the only avenue where truth can be found.
