One should always keep an Open Mind to the possibilities in life. It's only healthy!
You really put some thought into it, Twisting the minds of these poor souls! Attaboy Will! ; )
Blessed Be...
2006-07-28 07:41:15
·
answer #1
·
answered by Helzabet 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
I hate to nit-pick, but I fear I can find no other option: What do you mean by "exist?"
For most of us to determine if something exists, we need to have some way of detecting it. For a long time, we didn't know that quarks existed, but eventually technology advanced enough to allow the discovery of these minute phenomena. Do you assume that at some point there will come a technological break-through that will show the existence of God, that God can show up on a computer read-out? If not, if something by its nature is forever undetectable, how can anyone say that it exists? Doesn't the determination of existence mean we have experience of it (aided or unaided by technology) through some sensory organ?
The existence of quarks was suggested theoretically before their discovery. Where would we look for God's existence? What testable theory can you turn to that suggests how to testably search for God's existence? Since the only things we know to exist do so within time or space, can we claim that some particular entity beyond those realms exists?
If you pursue the "might God exist?" argument, you are inevitably going to reach a "yes" answer, but because nobody can ever have the experience of detecting that existence in the real world, you will then be left with the question, "Is the existence of an undetectable God at all relevant?"
At the same time, the cultural construct of God has several different manifestations, ranging variously from polytheism to the distant deistic watchmaker to loving guardian, etc. The existence of God-as-cultural-construct is undeniable in that its influence is felt throughout the globe. And because of this, I am left also to ask you, what do you mean by "God?"
2006-07-28 15:40:23
·
answer #2
·
answered by NHBaritone 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Sticky, sticky. :)
I feel God exists. It's not a might; it's a definite. But that's what *I* feel. I understand that he does not exist for others, and I'm completely fine with that.
I find this sticky, as religion and spirituality are such personal belief systems that we can only truly answer this for ourselves. This is not the case if I say "Feel this apple. This apple does exist." You feel it and it does exist for both of us.
Or "Hey check out this really old map. That road on there might still exist". It's a might because we don't know for sure. But we CAN prove one way or the other by traveling to that place and seeing if the road exists.
We can't prove that someone's opinion or belief system is "right" or "exists", because it's only right for THAT person, not everyone.
2006-07-28 15:43:13
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Define "God", and we'll let you know. If you say that God defies comprehension, then we cannot logically deduce it's existence even to the point of saying it "might" exist. You cannot, after all, state something comprehensible about something incomprehensible. In other words, your question is as valid as "Might wiffliwitzingham exist?". Without a definition, we can't begin to assert whether or not it does.
2006-07-28 14:36:01
·
answer #4
·
answered by Rev. Still Monkeys 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
You are really grasping at straws today aren't you?
Of course a god COULD exist, but so COULD anything you could possibly imagine ever. That doesn't make it a real thing. Wanting to believe in something and it actually existing are two completely different things.
2006-07-28 14:29:49
·
answer #5
·
answered by Biggest Douche in the Universe 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
your first question... (difference between "X definitely exists" and "X might exist"
> yes, there is, because saying "X definitely exists" implies that there is a certain proof of existance for X, while "X might exist" shows uncertainty and lack of any proof, because if you had a proof, you would say "X definitely exists".
concerning this question ("might God exist?"), there is no difference in "God definitely exists" and "God might exist", because a huge majority of the world population so strongly believes that He exists, that there does not need to be any proof for His existance - even though He might not exist, for most people He still does...
2006-07-28 14:45:16
·
answer #6
·
answered by baerchen80 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
I believe that God is a concept, not a living, breathing entity.
So, to me, there is no doubt that the concept of God exists.
So, to me, the question is "If the concept of God exists, might God exist?"
In other words, I don't know.
2006-07-28 14:35:44
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think with the common mathematical/scientific concept of infinity, proof of some God/creator force is inevitable.
2006-07-28 14:29:40
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
NO MIGHT, IF AND'S OR BUT'S ABOUT IT, JESUS CHRIST EXIST AND IS ALIVE AND WELL, WATCHING EVERY MOVE YOU MAKE AND LONGING FOR YOUR SOUL AND FOR YOU TO ALLOW HIMTO LOVE YOU AND CHERISH YOU AND BLESS YOU! HE WANT'S TO SOLVE YOUR PROBLEMS AND BE THE VERY BEST FRIEND YOU EVERY HAD, THESE ARE A FEW BENEFITS THAT GO ALONG WITH BEING A CHILD OF GOD OF BECOMING ROYALTY!
2006-07-28 14:32:11
·
answer #9
·
answered by Prayerwarrior 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
I jumped in after you listed your contradictory conditions. I think God fits in that category because he is "good" and the worst tyrant ever concieved.
2006-07-28 16:00:46
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋