How to know that God exists.

Pantheism is indeed theism, and it has precisely as much evidence for it as do any of the major monotheistic religions in the West.

aka. virtually none.

Hi MikeT, now that you bring in the word evidence, suppose you tell me what is evidence, then on your concept of evidence, I will produce evidence to prove that God exists and He is uniquely in quantity: one.
 
Hi everyone, the key to open the lock that anti God folks lock themselves in - for keeping God out, is the investigation of existence:

1. We humans are examples of contingent existence.
2. Contingent existence depends on necessary existence to come to existence.
3. The necessary existence is God.
 
Hi everyone, the key to open the lock that anti God folks lock themselves in - for keeping God out, is the investigation of existence:

1. We humans are examples of contingent existence.
2. Contingent existence depends on necessary existence to come to existence.
3. The necessary existence is God.
3 needs support.
 
Hi MikeT, now that you bring in the word evidence, suppose you tell me what is evidence
There are two meanings for the word.

The first is trivial: evidence is anything which suggests or demonstrates that an idea/claim is true. For example, evidence that I exist in reality would be that I continually experience a wide variety of phenomena, too rich but consistent, for my mind to have invented it all.

The second meaning entails objectivity. For example, the previous definition is merely subjective; my experiences are evidence TO ME that I exist. The other more-persuasive kind of evidence can be found at the local bank where I have an account, into week my weekly paychecks are deposited. Other people can look at that evidence and recognize that it strongly suggests someone with my name is making money, and must therefore exist and be employed somewhere. In this sense, evidence is anything which EMPIRICALLY suggests or demonstrates that an idea/claim is true.

NOTE: evidence need not be empirical. However, empirical evidence is the best possible kind.

on your concept of evidence, I will produce evidence to prove that God exists and He is uniquely in quantity: one.
You've already defined "God" as existence. No such evidence is necessary, because you've built a tautology.

This does not actually prove that your God exists, though. You might find it persuasive, but no one else can or will.
 
3 needs support.

Hi Whatsisface, thanks for the suggestion.

1. We humans are examples of contingent existence.
2. Contingent existence depends on necessary existence to come to existence.
3. The necessary existence is God.

The support for 3 is the implication of contingent beings - in ultimate summation.
 
Hi Whatsisface, thanks for the suggestion.

1. We humans are examples of contingent existence.
2. Contingent existence depends on necessary existence to come to existence.
3. The necessary existence is God.

The support for 3 is the implication of contingent beings - in ultimate summation.
An implication alone isn't enough to establish that said necessary existence is God.
 
An implication alone isn't enough to establish that said necessary existence is God.
Hi Whatsisface, I fear you are not getting the correct meaning of the word implication.

"Implicate" has a meaning of 'to show to be involved', whereas "imply" has no such connotation. Although they are pretty closely related, "implicate" generally has the meaning of "to involve", and "imply" has the meaning of "to indicate, suggest."
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=difference+between+imply+and+implicate

You see, all things in existence are inter-connected, including inter-connected to and with God.

So that everything that is not God, is connected to God from being created by God and sustained in existence by God.

Wherefore, an ancient man of wisdom declares, "In God we live and move and have our being."
 
Hi Whatsisface, I fear you are not getting the correct meaning of the word implication.

"Implicate" has a meaning of 'to show to be involved', whereas "imply" has no such connotation. Although they are pretty closely related, "implicate" generally has the meaning of "to involve", and "imply" has the meaning of "to indicate, suggest."
Fine, but in either case neither are enough to show said necessary existence is God.
You see, all things in existence are inter-connected, including inter-connected to and with God.

So that everything that is not God, is connected to God from being created by God and sustained in existence by God.

Wherefore, an ancient man of wisdom declares, "In God we live and move and have our being."
This is an assertion only and needs support.
 
Hilarious. Do you do animal balloons as well?

Yep, animal, mineral and vegetable. You should see my rutabaga balloon. It's rivaled only by my feldspar balloon.

But let's not allow my many talents to detract from the subject at hand. You called me dishonest, remember? So:

Fill in the blank:

"Stiggy was dishonest when he _________________________."
 
That which shows your assertions true would do it. If you can't offer said support, your assertions remain assertions only.

But you have got to tell me what support and how much you are disposed to accept and tell me, so that when I present the kind and quantity you are disposed to be satisfied with, then you will no longer demand again and again and again and again . . . support.
 
mikeT said:
. . . . . . .

You've already defined "God" as existence. No such evidence is necessary, because you've built a tautology.

. . . . . . .

Hi MikeT, please explain how I have committed a tautology. Okay?

------------------------

Paging MikeT:
Hi MikeT, please explain how I have committed a tautology. Okay?
 
But you have got to tell me what support and how much you are disposed to accept and tell me, so that when I present the kind and quantity you are disposed to be satisfied with, then you will no longer demand again and again and again and again . . . support.
I've already said, anything that confirms your assertions as true. If you can give that then there will be no further questions. But it looks like you're avoiding the issue which means you don't have such evidence.
 
Hi Oseas, why are you so harsh against people you deem to be plunging to hell?

Shouldn't you as a follower of Jesus Christ, the Son of God made unto man (and Jesus teaches His followers to even love their enemies) - thus you call yourself a Christian, shouldn't you be praying earnestly for their their conversion to Jesus, thus saved from hell?
Friend, the seventh and last millennium arrived, that is the seventh and last Day, the LORD's Day, now the time is of the righteous Judgment of GOD, the Judgment Seat of Christ; the Dispensation of Grace for salvation have already finished. Around two thousand years ago JESUS warned and said: "This Gospel of the Kingdom shall be preached in ALL the world for a witness unto ALL nations; and then shall the END come", this prophetic message of JESUS is fulfilling LITERALLY at this current time, understand? Now, now, if you are not knowing that the END OF ALL THINGS HAS ARRIVED, it is because you, and who is like you, are sleeping the sleep of death.

Furthermore, the condemnation and PUNISHMENT after this righteous Judgment of GOD is the ETERNAL perdition and it has already started, understand? Yeah, it has already started and it will NEVER END, it is for ever and ever, for everlasting to everlasting, withoud END, OF COURSE. It's that.
 
Back
Top