Ask not "Does God exist?" Ask "Why is God not different than He is?"

[Gottservant]

Hi there!

This is a simple twist on an old thought, designed to shake people out of complacency about the nature of God. The thought is typically "I know who God is, I know what He is, but does He really exist?" This is arrogance. First you are assuming all sorts of information about God, who you later go on to question, then you are questioning Him, as if all the stuff you thought about Him is irrelevant.

Either be objective and do not attribute anything to God in the first place, or find another way to question Him. I have suggested the latter, another way to question Him. This way is to simply say "I take for granted all that I do about God, who He is, where He is, what He does, but now because I am human and compelled to doubt, from time to time, I will question why God is not different to all that I have taken for granted about Him? I will ask why am I not fundamentally wrong about all I have assumed can be attributed to God, if I must be wrong about anything?" This is healthy doubt, because it can be answered by the exercise of the will, more generally, and not just the intellect, as is the case with the question of the existence of God.

Once you have determined for yourself, in the absence of needless distractions about whether someone else thinks what you do, why what you know does not change, you will see that the question about whether God exists is actually a much more circumstantial question than you might first expect. Questioning whether God exists, hinges on the self-importance of the questioner being able to renounce God's Godness as if that is somehow the choice of the questioner and not the choice of God.

There are many things you know about God, all of them come from Heaven, if they are from Him. They tell you about what to expect of God, what His nature is, how His imagination works, these are important learnings, they are not to be neglected. If you can keep from mixing these things with the opinions of others, but trust that the God within you is able to reveal the truth to you that there is about his nature and the nature of His love for you, you will find that it is actually very easy to trust Him whether or not He exists...

...that actually, whether God exists or not is the last thing on your mind.

 

[quatona]

This is a simple twist on an old thought, designed to shake people out of complacency about the nature of God. The thought is typically "I know who God is, I know what He is, but does He really exist?" This is arrogance. First you are assuming all sorts of information about God, who you later go on to question, then you are questioning Him, as if all the stuff you thought about Him is irrelevant.

That´s what theists do. I am just responding to their concepts.

Either be objective and do not attribute anything to God in the first place

I´m not sure that theists will be comfortable with a completely undefined "God". Personally, I am quite fine with simply ignoring meaningless terms.

, or find another way to question Him.

Nobody is questioning "Him". We are questioning human claims.

There are many things you know about God, all of them come from Heaven, if they are from Him.

No, all I know is claims of my fellow humans.

...that actually, whether God exists or not is the last thing on your mind.

Indeed, it is.

 

[Maximillia]

This is a very nice thread thank you for posting it.

 

[bricklayer]

Anything that is subject to change is subject; it is not-sovereign. It is not-necessary; it is contingent.

That which is necessary cannot change.

All that exists contingently changes constantly.

God cannot create something on par with Himself. God cannot create something that does not change.

God cannot change. God cannot come to know, come to feel or come to will.

God is necessary; everything else is contingent.

 

[Paradoxum]

Hi there!

This is a simple twist on an old thought, designed to shake people out of complacency about the nature of God. The thought is typically "I know who God is, I know what He is, but does He really exist?" This is arrogance. First you are assuming all sorts of information about God, who you later go on to question, then you are questioning Him, as if all the stuff you thought about Him is irrelevant.

Either be objective and do not attribute anything to God in the first place, or find another way to question Him. I have suggested the latter, another way to question Him. This way is to simply say "I take for granted all that I do about God, who He is, where He is, what He does, but now because I am human and compelled to doubt, from time to time, I will question why God is not different to all that I have taken for granted about Him? I will ask why am I not fundamentally wrong about all I have assumed can be attributed to God, if I must be wrong about anything?" This is healthy doubt, because it can be answered by the exercise of the will, more generally, and not just the intellect, as is the case with the question of the existence of God.

That is worthwhile to question.

Once you have determined for yourself, in the absence of needless distractions about whether someone else thinks what you do, why what you know does not change, you will see that the question about whether God exists is actually a much more circumstantial question than you might first expect. Questioning whether God exists, hinges on the self-importance of the questioner being able to renounce God's Godness as if that is somehow the choice of the questioner and not the choice of God.

What do you mean? Why is it any different from asking if Santa exists?

There are many things you know about God, all of them come from Heaven, if they are from Him. They tell you about what to expect of God, what His nature is, how His imagination works, these are important learnings, they are not to be neglected. If you can keep from mixing these things with the opinions of others, but trust that the God within you is able to reveal the truth to you that there is about his nature and the nature of His love for you, you will find that it is actually very easy to trust Him whether or not He exists...

...that actually, whether God exists or not is the last thing on your mind.

What?

 

[Davian]

Hi there!

This is a simple twist on an old thought, designed to shake people out of complacency about the nature of God. The thought is typically "I know who God is, I know what He is, but does He really exist?" This is arrogance.

I never think this.

First you are assuming all sorts of information about God, who you later go on to question, then you are questioning Him, as if all the stuff you thought about Him is irrelevant.

Outside of being a character in a book, I would not assume anything about the God of the Christian bible.

Either be objective and do not attribute anything to God in the first place, or find another way to question Him. I have suggested the latter, another way to question Him. This way is to simply say "I take for granted all that I do about God, who He is, where He is, what He does, but now because I am human and compelled to doubt, from time to time, I will question why God is not different to all that I have taken for granted about Him? I will ask why am I not fundamentally wrong about all I have assumed can be attributed to God, if I must be wrong about anything?" This is healthy doubt, because it can be answered by the exercise of the will, more generally, and not just the intellect, as is the case with the question of the existence of God.

I doubt that.

Once you have determined for yourself, in the absence of needless distractions about whether someone else thinks what you do, why what you know does not change, you will see that the question about whether God exists is actually a much more circumstantial question than you might first expect. Questioning whether God exists, hinges on the self-importance of the questioner being able to renounce God's Godness as if that is somehow the choice of the questioner and not the choice of God.

No, I don't think so.

There are many things you know about God, all of them come from Heaven, if they are from Him. They tell you about what to expect of God, what His nature is, how His imagination works, these are important learnings, they are not to be neglected.

Or it is just stuff written by men, and put in a book.

If you can keep from mixing these things with the opinions of others, but trust that the God within you is able to reveal the truth to you that there is about his nature and the nature of His love for you, you will find that it is actually very easy to trust Him whether or not He exists...

Not if he is just a character in a book.

...that actually, whether God exists or not is the last thing on your mind.

Pretty much.

 

[Gadarene]

"Ask not "Does God exist?" Ask "Why is God not different than He is?" Why would I ask such a loaded question, when there is no evidence to think God exists in the first place?

 

[Gottservant]

"Ask not "Does God exist?" Ask "Why is God not different than He is?" Why would I ask such a loaded question, when there is no evidence to think God exists in the first place?

Better to ask a loaded question, and receive a biased answer, than to ask the impossible, and cry fowl.

In any case "Does God exist?" is a loaded question, as I tried to point out. If you had engaged with the reasons I demonstrated, you would realize that you were presupposing self-control that a mere question of logical inversion does not give you.

I suggest, that if people want to engage with what I said, they actually attempt to ask the alternative question, instead of simply questioning it before they have done anything. It is once again, case in point, that you are remaining determined to give the least response to a question that demands the most, as a minimum. If you do not change that, you will get nowhere, and you will have only yourselves to blame.

 

[Gottservant]

What do you mean? Why is it any different from asking if Santa exists?

Yes, exactly, there is a parallel with other illusions.

Imagine asking not "Does Santa exist?" but "Why does Santa never give different gifts than he does?"

Can you see how one is likely to lead you to the truth, and the other is merely going to lead you in circles?

This is the point I am trying to make, there is a way to direct the bias of loaded subjects and their respective questions. If you are not attempting to direct the bias to something constructive, you are wasting everybody's time... possibly confusing yourself in the process.

 

[Paradoxum]

Yes, exactly, there is a parallel with other illusions.

Imagine asking not "Does Santa exist?" but "Why does Santa never give different gifts than he does?"

Can you see how one is likely to lead you to the truth, and the other is merely going to lead you in circles?

This is the point I am trying to make, there is a way to direct the bias of loaded subjects and their respective questions. If you are not attempting to direct the bias to something constructive, you are wasting everybody's time... possibly confusing yourself in the process.

I still don't know what you mean. Asking "Does Santa exist", will lead to the truth, and the other question to circles. But what is your point? What do you mean "direct the bias to something constructive"?

 

[FatalHeart]

"There is no evidence to think God exists in the first place."

Evidence: that which tends to prove or disprove something.

Prove: demonstrate the truth or existence of (something)

Truth: the state of being the case

Apparently, there is no way to ask God to defend Himself. I had no idea prayer was entirely impossible.

 

[Gadarene]

Better to ask a loaded question, and receive a biased answer, than to ask the impossible, and cry fowl.

If asking does god exist is asking the impossible, then that only shows how tenuous the notion of his existence is.

 

[tonybeer]

Hi there!

This is a simple twist on an old thought, designed to shake people out of complacency about the nature of God. The thought is typically "I know who God is, I know what He is, but does He really exist?" This is arrogance. First you are assuming all sorts of information about God, who you later go on to question, then you are questioning Him, as if all the stuff you thought about Him is irrelevant.

The burden of proof is on the claimant. Atheists deny a claim from a Christian. The claim from the Christian contains a definition and information about God.

You can't just say something exists, and not then define it in some way or give some information about how you know it exists.

 

[FatalHeart]

I'll repost this here then too: All I think is that atheists need to put the burden of proof on the right person. It is not theists that believe God exists, it is God that said He existed, and theists believed Him. As long as religion isn't taken to the source, you don't get source answers; how extremely easy it would be if all theists and atheists sought God for themselves and saw what He would do. It would render arguing about it useless, because, well, either God exists or He doesn't. Until you move to that place, I don't see the circles ever ending. For me personally, I sought God and heard His voice and bam: theist. I didn't play around asking the church questions because we all know people are stupid. But God, yeah, if God exists I should be able to find Him myself and then the question would certainly be answered, and guess what, I was right.

 

[tonybeer]

I'll repost this here then too: All I think is that atheists need to put the burden of proof on the right person. It is not theists that believe God exists, it is God that said He existed, and theists believed Him. As long as religion isn't taken to the source, you don't get source answers; how extremely easy it would be if all theists and atheists sought God for themselves and saw what He would do. It would render arguing about it useless, because, well, either God exists or He doesn't. Until you move to that place, I don't see the circles ever ending. For me personally, I sought God and heard His voice and bam: theist. I didn't play around asking the church questions because we all know people are stupid. But God, yeah, if God exists I should be able to find Him myself and then the question would certainly be answered, and guess what, I was right.

Errrr,

The burden of proof is on you to provide evidence of God. You are still claiming God exists.

 

[Gadarene]

Errrr,

The burden of proof is on you to provide evidence of God. You are still claiming God exists.

But now with tautology!

 

[FatalHeart]

Aight. Which is more concrete, something someone says about me or something you learn from spending time with me? If I had fifty friends and they all wrote a book about me, would it be more important to believe the book or time with me when it came to who I am? Do you even know if the 50 people know who I am? What if you are having doubt I exist? Would it be more important to go to these 50 people and ask them about my existence, or come over to my house where I live every day? Now, agreed, you don't even know if I have a house or where that house is. Meaning, the only reasonable way of finding me is waiting for me to come to you. That's how you find God. Because I can beat with all my strength on the door, but if you don't get up and answer it, or you are too busy or too pre-occupied, or not looking for it, or sleeping, it's going to have no effect. That's why I say seek God with all your heart and He will provide the evidence:

"Behold! I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in and eat with him, and he with me."

 

[Gadarene]

Aight. Which is more concrete, something someone says about me or something you learn from spending time with me? If I had fifty friends and they all wrote a book about me, would it be more important to believe the book or time with me when it came to who I am?

When the only notion of God is confined to one particular book, and those written by people inspired by it, can the same God be really said to have any kind of validity?

If the Bible is unreliable, and that's the primary source of the claims about the Christian god, then the concept of the Christian god is unreliable beyond that. How do you know you are even worshipping the same god?

Do you even know if the 50 people know who I am? What if you are having doubt I exist? Would it be more important to go to these 50 people and ask them about my existence, or come over to my house where I live every day? Now, agreed, you don't even know if I have a house or where that house is. Meaning, the only reasonable way of finding me is waiting for me to come to you. That's how you find God. Because I can beat with all my strength on the door, but if you don't get up and answer it, or you are too busy or too pre-occupied, or not looking for it, or sleeping, it's going to have no effect. That's why I say seek God with all your heart and He will provide the evidence:

"Behold! I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in and eat with him, and he with me."

Except when he doesn't, as already pointed out to you.

 

[tonybeer]

Aight. Which is more concrete, something someone says about me or something you learn from spending time with me? If I had fifty friends and they all wrote a book about me, would it be more important to believe the book or time with me when it came to who I am? Do you even know if the 50 people know who I am? What if you are having doubt I exist? Would it be more important to go to these 50 people and ask them about my existence, or come over to my house where I live every day? Now, agreed, you don't even know if I have a house or where that house is. Meaning, the only reasonable way of finding me is waiting for me to come to you. That's how you find God. Because I can beat with all my strength on the door, but if you don't get up and answer it, or you are too busy or too pre-occupied, or not looking for it, or sleeping, it's going to have no effect. That's why I say seek God with all your heart and He will provide the evidence:

"Behold! I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in and eat with him, and he with me."

So I have to assume he exists first and then try and find evidence to support this belief?

 

[Eight Foot Manchild]

All I think is that atheists need to put the burden of proof on the right person.

The burden of proof falls on the positive claimant. You are the positive claimant. The burden of proof is therefor yours.

It is that simple.

It is not theists that believe God exists,

Yes, it is. That's precisely what 'theist' means.

it is God that said He existed, and theists believed Him.

This is another positive claim, which requires substantiation on your part.

As long as religion isn't taken to the source, you don't get source answers;

The source is you, the religious.

how extremely easy it would be if all theists and atheists sought God for themselves and saw what He would do.

I have no indication that there is anything to seek.

It would render arguing about it useless, because, well, either God exists or He doesn't. Until you move to that place, I don't see the circles ever ending.

It might feel like a circle to you, but in fact it's a straight line - you are the positive claimant, therefor the burden of proof is yours.

For me personally, I sought God and heard His voice and bam: theist.

You were already a theist if you 'sought god' from the outset.

There is literally nothing you can't prove to yourself if you believe it from the get go and then seek evidence to support it. It's not a path to reality. It's a path to the doldrums of your own imagination.

I didn't play around asking the church questions because we all know people are stupid.

I also know that smart people can have stupid beliefs.

But God, yeah, if God exists I should be able to find Him myself and then the question would certainly be answered, and guess what, I was right.

You've given no indication that this 'god' exists anywhere outside your imagination.