What would you do if you found out God existed

[Minimalist]

But you are saying "based on what I believe."  Big difference.

[Catholic_Lady]

Ultimately we don't have concrete evidence, so we can't know for sure. But I see nothing wrong with saying "Based on what I do know, this is what I believe is probably the case." We do that all the time in real life, with all sorts of things.

We don't have concrete evidence to support the existence of many things, yet we are perfectly comfortable daily stating for a fact that they do not exist: unicorns, Santa Clause, etc.  There is no reason for god to be eliminated from that list.

Bolded:  Provide an example or two of which sorts of things.

My doctor thinks I have a certain condition based on a couple of things. The only way to know for sure is to have another surgery... which I haven't had yet. Nonetheless, it is his opinion that I have this condition.  

It is suspected that Maura Murray who disappeared back in 2004 simply walked into the woods and succumbed to the elements. Animal activity may explain her body never having been found. No proof of anything yet, but this seems to be the logical conclusion according to the local police.

[Foxaèr]

My doctor thinks I have a certain condition based on a couple of things. The only way to know for sure is to have another surgery... which I haven't had yet. Nonetheless, it is his opinion that I have this condition.  

It is suspected that Maura Murray who disappeared back in 2004 simply walked into the woods and succumbed to the elements. Animal activity may explain her body never having been found. No proof of anything yet, but this seems to be the logical conclusion according to the local police.

And there is nothing wrong with that; for the doctor is relying upon his medical knowledge to give you a general idea, most likely until the lab results return. Also, nothing wrong with the girl getting lost in the woods; the police must rely upon their knowledge of the local area and how animals behave there.

Now, if one was to illogically insert god, in one form or another, into those scenarios, then that would be unreasonable.

[Catholic_Lady]

My point is we make educated guesses all the time. Just because there is no concrete proof of something doesn't automatically mean we should discard it as a possibility. Believing in the existence of the supernatural is no different.

As far as the origin of the universe is concerned:

1. We don't have proof that there are certain things in the natural/physical world that have always existed or that can spontaneously start existing from nothing. In fact, we only have proof to the contrary. Things in the physical natural world have a beginning and come from something else.

2. We also don't have proof that there exists anything beyond the natural physical world which would defy these laws of nature - aka, the supernatural.

If you say "there absolutely is nothing beyond our natural physical world", you're basically conceding that something in the natural physical world either has always existed or spontaneously came to exist, even though there is no proof that either of this can happen.

If you say "obviously there is more beyond our natural physical world that is not bound by the laws of nature", you're taking a position that also has no proof.

Either way, you're making some sort of guess that is not based on concrete evidence.

[The Grand Nudger]

God is the opposite of an educated guess. Always has been.

[Foxaèr]

My point is we make educated guesses all the time.

"God" or "supernatural" is hardly an educated guess, it's a mere intellectually lazy response for people who cannot properly distinguish between fantasy and reality.

Just because there is no concrete proof of something doesn't automatically mean we should discard it as a possibility.

Sure it does; I don't see you scrambling to profess your belief in monsters under the bed.

Believing in the existence of the supernatural is no different.

By all means, believe in the existence of absolutely everything for which we have no evidence to support its existence; don't blame me for calling you out on your delusion.

[Captain_Nemo]

People who believe that the supernatural exists should do so because it makes logical sense to them, for one reason or another.

Perhaps "illogical sense" would be a better choice of words?




You have to willingly jump through lots of hoops to get there.

This is just as if somebody threw away the word tetrahedron because he does not know how to understand it.
The question about religious systems is not weather You believe in a word or not, because its there. A religious system incorporates different societal strata, which will all understand the word differently. There is only one true meaning of a given word in such a system, which is the meaning as it is understood by the highest priest.

Learning integrals takes at least one semester. No student ever dared to say that he does not believe in integrals and will not study it because he thinks its stupid. One has to see the infinite dumbness of today's society, the arrogance of the people who work in the camp of liars.


In my society people with high intelectual capabilities have been killed during or shortly after world war 2, why would anybody want to keep the average intelligence at a lower rather than higher level. John Paul 2 said that wise citizen's are the greatest asset of any society. 
Now if we take into account that resources are the main goal of war and conquest it becomes obvious that dumbing people down and feeding them with disinformation is a move that will be used by any group of power against other players.


Just take a simple example of how certain information that are obvious are being completely ignored. Have You ever felt somebody's gaze on You. Has any girl ever turned around after You stared at her for too long. There are many examples that show how science is selective and ignores any kind of information that could lead to discoveries that would underminde the stability of the power structure. It is obvious that a prove of the supernatural even if proven without any possibility of doubt would not be shared with the public. There is a book by Le Bon about mass psychology that touches a very sensetive topic. This topic has been studied further in non public institutions and the information is classified.

Why would there be something as classified information if not to prevent somebody from knowing something. Has anybody touched the topic of the success rate of this system? What kind of measures would be taken to prevent leakes of information? Obviously truth is not just something that can be put into the mainstream and circulated as one would wish it to happen.

[The Grand Nudger]

Do you really want to discuss success rates of systems in a comparison between god belief and science.........?

[Minimalist]

Have You ever felt somebody's gaze on You.

No.  And neither have you.  But you do have an active imagination.

[Foxaèr]

If you say "there absolutely is nothing beyond our natural physical world", you're basically conceding that something in the natural physical world either has always existed or spontaneously came to exist, even though there is no proof that either of this can happen.

Just a little definition before I continue. I am a strong atheist:

Strong atheism, also sometimes referred to as explicit atheism, goes one step further and involves denying the existence of at least one god, usually multiple gods, and sometimes the possible existence of any gods at all.

Therefore, unlike the weak atheist, don't confuse all of us because not everyone on this forum is a strong atheist like myself, I have no qualms in making the positive claim that god, the supernatural, does not exist.

Absence of evidence is a valid, logical argument; as I have already mentioned previously, I do not see you scrambling to profess your belief in everything for which there is no evidence to support its existence: i.e., the monster under the bed. The fact that you willingly believe in god, the supernatural, in the absence of any hard evidence, is your mental hang-up, not mine.