Philosophical question: what if I could prove the existence of god?

[darom03]

If I, somehow, were able to prove to the world - without any question of doubt whatsoever - that a god existed. I just could not say which one.

What would happen?

Keep in mind that anyone in the world now KNOWS that a god exists. They just do not know which.

Edit: corrected a typo by request.

[DG_Knight]

It isn't possible to prove the existence of the Christian form of God. That's how it was designed.

Also, nice spelling.

[darom03]

[ QUOTE ]
It isn't possible to prove the existence of the Christian form of God. That's how it was designed.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hence the philosophical question, Moran...

[DrewDevil]

How about posting this in "Science, Math, Philosophy?"

This forum is about trying to get laid and other random stuff.

[Mother Mucker]

I would hit that bitch in the face with a pan for causing all these wars and [censored]. [censored] dick.

[darom03]

[ QUOTE ]
How about posting this in "Science, Math, Philosophy?"

This forum is about trying to get laid and other random stuff.

[/ QUOTE ]

Lol, I see what you are getting at! [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

[DG_Knight]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It isn't possible to prove the existence of the Christian form of God. That's how it was designed.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hence the philosophical question, Moran...

[/ QUOTE ]

You would be disregarding all semblances of reality, so then what would be the point? It's like asking, what if the world wasn't like what it is? Brilliant question.

[LargeCents]

Yeah, wrong forum.

The first step is to define what you mean by "God". When it comes to Philosophy, definitions are everything. I had a Philosophy professor define God in a pretty generic way, and went ahead and proved the existence of "God" in an intro to Philosophy course that I took. His definition of God was something like, "A being in the universe that is greater in scope than everything in the universe." Of course this begs the question of what "being", "scope" and "everything" mean, but he also implicitly defined those in very generic terms also, I imagine.

My take is that God may exist, but it is a huge leap of faith to say much of anything about the nature of God. Science may give us insight into "artifacts" of God's creation, but I don't think that says anything at all about God's will, much less morality or anything else.

So, your first task is to define God. If you define God in any traditional sense, such as defined by Christian, Jewish, Muslim faiths, etc, I think you'll have an impossible task of proving much. In fact, I bet you can almost prove that that kind of God doesn't exist, except that the nature of these religions is that the definitions of God are not very Philosophically rigorous and the definition of God will change over time, so as soon as you can prove that God doesn't exist in some sense, the definition will simply change enough so there is reasonable doubt. The same goes for other obscure "God" religions, I imagine, I am just not familiar with all of them. So, either define God in a meaningless way, and you can prove God exists, or define God in a larger sense, but you'll leave all kinds of doubt that only a true "faith" believer can accept.

[blinden84]

I would probably be able to convince myself that I was god, if I was sure that there was one, I would gain followers, and a war of epic proportions would ensue, which the Blindenites would win.

[Senor Choppy]

Proving something that you haven't defined isn't really proving anything.