I am a theist, what do you think of my proof for God existing?

[Mariosep]

Astreja says (#289), but first, thanks Astreja, for coming over, we are both new here; there, that is my greeting to you, and I want to tell you I love all women because women are the mothers of mankind.



From Mariosep
So we have two items here:

1. The information on the concept of God.
2. The what and how to prove the existence of something.

From Astreja
#1 is a problem because god-concepts vary widely from one religion to another, and even from one believer to another within the same religion. This really should be taken care of before proceeding to #2, because it will have an impact on how to proceed in the search.

Regarding "what and how," I'm someone who is generally not impressed by hypothetical evidence such as is found in apologetics, and prefer actual physical evidence to anything else. In the case of trying to prove the existence of a god, since the claim itself is so extraordinary and so out of keeping with what I know of the world, physical evidence is the only thing good enough to support belief in a god's existence.


Forgive me, Astreja, but you seem to be repeating what we might call the party's standard reaction to my information on the concept of God, namely, in concept God is first and foremost the creator and operator of the universe and man and everything with a beginning.

You tell me that there are many God, gods, goddesses, deities, divinities, etc., owing to there being so many different religions, etc., so?

So, dear Astreja, start with at least one or you will never get to know seriously at all what is the information on the concept of God, etc., and miss to relate with people who do know for certain that God exists.

As regards your reaction to my idea on what it is to prove something to exist in objective reality, I see that you also speak the party's standard heart and mind, but that is not the issue, let me explain:

Evidence is never hypothetical unless it is all a mental exercise all in your mind, what scientists call a thought experiment.

They have a thought experiment with thought evidence, but you know what?

Do you know that they are going into objective reality, to look for objective concrete evidence to validate their mental exercise and their thought experiment?

Now, I say that God in concept is first and foremost the creator and operator of the universe and man and everything with a beginning; yes, that is all in the mind.

But you are not paying attention to the rest of my explanation of what it is tor prove something existing in objective realty outside of thinking in our mind.

I continue all the time repeatedly as to wear out the temper of our dear fellow humans here who are atheists, I continue with telling atheists here that we will go forth into objective reality to search for all instances of causation, which all are concrete evidence of the existence of an entity in objective reality corresponding to the concept of God, namely, in concept, first and foremost the creator, understand that as cause, and the operator, understand as cause, of the universe and man and everything with a beginning.

Now, let you and me, let us recall that our parents caused us to come into existence and life, by their love-making.

That is one instance of causation, and God is the first and ultimate cause of all intermediary causes; think about that, with your reason and intelligence grounded on truths, facts, logic, and the history of ideas.

The party's line response to this search for evidence in all instances of causation in the world, you tell me because I have already seen that line everywhere with atheists.

You tell me, and I will explain to you that it is not anything founded on truths, facts, logic, and the history of ideas.

It is not founded on reason and intelligence.


Please stay with me.