Evidence God Exists: Part II

[tavarish]

Ok I can comprehend that explanation. So why is everyone so up in arms when Fr0d0 say God just is, he's self-evident. I'll fit it into your explination:

God isn't demonstrably self-evident.

I can demonstrate the existence of the universe to you - in fact, I wouldn't even have to. The fact you're reading this affirms that you indeed exist, and reside within our universe's parameters.

Here's a quick recap:

Do you exist?

If yes, then you have just demonstrated that you are, indeed part of this universe - defined as the sum of totality. In fact, I'd go as far as to say the universe is something our perception cannot be without, and has reached a point where we as a species have reached a consensus about how to view the universe, if only in a strictly basic sense of survival.

Even if you were a solipsist in the strictest sense of the word and made the case that everyone else is a conjuration of yours, your existence within the framework of the universe would still be just as demonstrable and your perceptions still just as self-evident. This is also evidenced in the guiding axiom called the primacy of existence - that existence exists regardless of our perceptions.

God - meaning creator of our enviornment - is self evident. It is the basis to which morality applies.

That doesn't make any sense.

Things based on certain modes of perception, namely physically demonstrable entities can be self-evident. If we both go outside and it's raining and we experience it, that perception is self-evident. We require no more proof or evidence for that matter - we take for granted that our perceptions are true, and that rain is indeed falling from the sky. Moreover, the wealth of perceptions we have give us a sort of buffer against delusion.

For example, if it started raining lego bricks and no one around me noticed, my perception could be at fault, but this can only be known through the experience that it has never rained legos in my life, and such a prospect would be infinitesimally unlikely.

However, the fact that it's raining is by no means affected by my perception of it, exactly the opposite. My perception is affected by the fact that it's raining.

In other instances, these same criteria would not apply, for example if we were in a building with no windows and someone told us it was raining. That wouldn't be self-evident, because we have absolutely no way of knowing if it is indeed raining or not. This requires empirical evidence.

This is where God comes in. . Those who think about things rationally rather than emotionally have trouble grasping the concept of a contradictory being that is the necessary author of the universe, especially taking such a claim wholly on faith. It won't fly, and you need extraordinary evidence for such a claim, since the claim has very lofty sights and explanatory scope.

This doesn't mean God doesn't exist independently somewhere, it just means that such a being hasn't been demonstrated to exist, and can therefore colloquially can be said NOT to exist. Note that this isn't an absolute certainty, but in the same sense as leprechauns, santa claus, and pixies.

You make distinctions in your life based on your perceptions of God.

Wrong. Decisions in my life don't include God, nor do I perceive him.

It's a given that everything you percieve is from God since God created everything.

It's logically valid, but your premises are unsound. You have yet to demonstrate that a God exists.

The concept of God will be percieved as righteous if it conforms with your idea of how reality works. God is self evident because it's used as a method for determining what is right and not right - I use God as a yardstick to measure and improve individual morality.

That only gives me insight to your subjective interpretation of a God concept, it has no explanatory value or demonstrable qualities at all.