Why God cannot be proven?

[lumineth Realm Lord]

Above all, if we're talking about the god of monotheistic religions, gods in general, or some transcendent source, I think that all one can do is just do magic. Chant, invoke, meditate, do rituals. Whatever it is you're looking for, you go to it. It doesn't come to you.

Unfortunately, this doesn't mean one magician can prove that "God" (being an analogy for the divine) exists on his own. All he can do is make enough stuff happen to show that there's something out there. If this sort of thing happens collectively, then more people will know that "God" exists.

However, what I've often found is that, the people who want prove that "God" exists are also the types who think the occult is of the devil. So, it's a mute point.

 

[Konsciencia]

Hot take: God can be proven, it just requires something of the individual. I've heard too many reports of people who demanded God prove its existence to them (often with a deadline, say, 48 hours) and received their proof. That's all you have to do. God is a force that responds to man, and man saying "show me yourself" is sufficient. And I don't mean some ego driven thing like "God, if you're real, make me find a winning lotto ticket on the ground" or "God, if you're real, make this coin I flip land on the edge". I mean something open-ended, proof you aren't looking for, just ask the universe to remove all doubt. You'll get your proof.

Of course, that's the paradox. You have to believe enough to ask to get the proof that removes all doubt. Someone who is skeptical of God probably won't have the balls to ask him to show up.

I feel that I am responding to myself, whenever The Universe answers. And based on my experiences. The Universe can manifest as whoever It wants. Including Jesus and Lucifer.

 

[PinealisGlandia]

Well, Someone does answer , but that doesn't mean that it is god. My bet would be on spirit guides or other spirit allies.

That's just a manifestation of the godforce. People with heavily religious backgrounds often have qualms with the word "god", especially with a capital G, but frankly I'd just feel ridiculous calling it the "Force" all the time like I think I'm a Jedi. It's the same shit though.

What do you really mean by your post, though? Have you actually done this experiment, and gotten an answer, but somehow you think this answer is from a secondary force rather than the one that permeates everything? What would the nature of this secondary force be contrary to the force I described? To say that it's a "spirit" and not "God" implies some difference. Considering my view is that the spirit world is God, I don't really comprehend the distinction.

 

[Morell]

That's just a manifestation of the godforce. People with heavily religious backgrounds often have qualms with the word "god", especially with a capital G, but frankly I'd just feel ridiculous calling it the "Force" all the time like I think I'm a Jedi. It's the same shit though.

What do you really mean by your post, though? Have you actually done this experiment, and gotten an answer, but somehow you think this answer is from a secondary force rather than the one that permeates everything? What would the nature of this secondary force be contrary to the force I described? To say that it's a "spirit" and not "God" implies some difference. Considering my view is that the spirit world is God, I don't really comprehend the distinction.

Well, I do have very different worldview for sure. I'm aware that you speak about all encompassing god, or how would you define it. My worldview is different, I'm hard polytheist. (since I follow LHP, I think that it makes sense to be hard polytheist) I do believe in many gods with their own souls and free will. Spirits that are not gods can however have influence on reality too. These can hear you and understand you far better than any almighty being that has way bigger picture and duties in mind... if it even exists.

 

[Romolo]

I like to shake the dice of a question, and see what other forms the same question can take. If you reformulate “What is the proof of God’s existence?” into “Where is the evidence of God’s existence?” or even “Where can we see God revealed?”, “When can we feel God’s presence?” the answers will be very different, and in my opinion more interesting. “Proof” as a method is very mathematical. It has a long tradition in theology, but I always felt the challenge itself, “proving God’s existence”, is mixing up different levels of the world (in this case the scientific and the spiritual). It’s like asking yourself what’s the smell of the color purple, or the ethics of an apple falling from a tree. There are other angles to the question, other frames, that offer much more satisfying answers…

 

[Swampdweller900]

It's worth mentioning that lots of things can't be proven. To "prove" something in a scientific context, first you have to be able to test for it, and be able to replicate the test.

So how does one "prove" evolution like that? You can't. Literally, the theory of evolution can never be fully proven. Same with many theories in physics and astrophysics, there simply aren't ways to test them, the closest thing to "proofs" there are rely on math that sort of checks out, but could be wrong.

Which also means that to some degree, a proof also needs observation and measurement, and we have no way to actually measure psychic energy. Until we have a device that can measure that, it's like telling caveman all about ionizing radiation. He'll call you crazy and stupid, and tell you that the effects of radiation are a million other things he knows from experience. Until you give him a Geiger counter, train him to use the Geiger counter, get him to believe the Geiger counter works, and then let him run the same tests, you will be called a mad fool.

 

[AlfrunGrima]

This is the question I came across. I have my own answers to that question, but I want to here from you all. What do you think?

Why God cannot be proven?

One of problems with proving is the image, the idea what God is, is so fractal. Every human, every culture and every time has its own God. There are as many Gods as there are religious people. If you put 100 people on the edge of a circle facing inwards watching the same object, you get 99 different observations. I like the idea of comparing God with those shiny mirroring witch balls you see in gardens. Everyone who looks, looks in its own mirror.... God as a witch ball, why not?

Post automatically merged: Monday at 9:12 AM

I like to shake the dice of a question, and see what other forms the same question can take. If you reformulate “What is the proof of God’s existence?” into “Where is the evidence of God’s existence?” or even “Where can we see God revealed?”, “When can we feel God’s presence?” the answers will be very different, and in my opinion more interesting. “Proof” as a method is very mathematical. It has a long tradition in theology, but I always felt the challenge itself, “proving God’s existence”, is mixing up different levels of the world (in this case the scientific and the spiritual). It’s like asking yourself what’s the smell of the color purple, or the ethics of an apple falling from a tree. There are other angles to the question, other frames, that offer much more satisfying answers…

Yes, you pointed out good questions. Where we can find God and how do we experience him (or hers when it is a Goddess) If people starting with connecting to dieties these are very good questions to start with. And by then, people find their own evidences.

 

[Konsciencia]

I experience God within me. So find Him/Her within yourself not outside of you.

 

[MorganBlack]

I'm a pantheist. I like all you guys. Atheists too.

We all have to interrogate the nature of reality with the tools and frameworks we are using, to the best of our ability. I like to talk Christian theology with Catholics. Pagan gods with pagans. Demons with Demolators. I can get on board with atheism, as long as they are not hard atheists and try to be too reductive with their models. But I feel that way about all models.

I think magic works best in the liminal space between belief and non-belief. So when people go Evangelical or full Calvinist it makes me sad. Calvinist pagans, Calvinist atheists both need to "explain" The Mystery and The Phenomenon and I feel it locks down the range of expression a bit too much. That said, in your own ritual work, lock that shit down all you want!

Post automatically merged: Yesterday at 9:16 PM

Speaking to the main topic more. Where I differ with Catholics is I include all of you in the category as also being God.

 

[Robert Ramsay]

I think magic works best in the liminal space between belief and non-belief.

IMO, belief systems are the easiest way to implement magic, but it is possible to subsitute your belief in your own abilities for any belief system and achieve the same amount of success. Thus, the belief system is a tool to access your magical abilities.