There are a lot of questions seeking for proof of something. It makes me wonder what people consider proof. Is it knowing, feeling and seeing things yourself? or do some people seek the approval and consensus of others as proof?
2007-04-13 10:11:05 · 9 answers · asked by moonman 6 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
I am referring to a proof of anything, but if you want a specific topic you can answer about proof of God's existence. This is safe since most religions believe in a higher power.
2007-04-13 10:21:10 · update #1
JP: Why is touching him the only proof you will accept? Can you not accept other proof just as easily? I mean even if you saw Christ with the prints in him, you could discredit it as someone who has wounds similar to what Christ had. I respect your viewpoint though as many people share your view, and it is very valid as it is hard to believe anything as time passes unless you have a memory that makes the experience tangible.
2007-04-13 10:42:22 · update #2
I think many people want to physically "see" something for proof.
And the funny thing is, with God, He has given us visual proof of His existence. Look at creation! Romans 1:20
2007-04-13 10:18:58 · answer #1 · answered by Mandolyn Monkey Munch 6 · 0⤊ 4⤋
Real "proof" requires logical consistency with a set of known laws, hence seeking "proof" for theological matters is silly. Religions are based on faith, not proof. When something becomes proveable it no longer belongs in the realm of theology.
For example, if we could "prove" there was a God, He would cease to be worthy of theological consideration, and humans would begin to seek (and probably worship) the theorectical construct that created "Him"...
Consensus does not constitute proof of anything. Close to 90% of any population believe they are "above average intelligence", LOL!
2007-04-13 10:19:54 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
The senses are imperfect, we are in illusion, we make mistakes and we have the tendency to cheat and to be cheated. With these defects, how can we come to the right conclusion to be for or against something. Whatever you learn in the University is imperfectt because it has been teaching by imperfec human beings. Scientist are just like children playing with the inconceivable energy of the Lord. How then they can be sure of their researches?.
Therefore you have to receive knowledge from some one who is beyond from these defects. That is proof.
2007-04-13 12:08:15 · answer #3 · answered by ? 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
For me to accept Christianity, the proof I want actually comes straight out of the Bible, and such proof was given even, and the person was chided, but not cursed, for needing it.
NIV (John 20:24-28)
----------------------
24Now Thomas (called Didymus), one of the Twelve, was not with the disciples when Jesus came. 25So the other disciples told him, "We have seen the Lord!"
But he said to them, "Unless I see the nail marks in his hands and put my finger where the nails were, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe it."
26A week later his disciples were in the house again, and Thomas was with them. Though the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, "Peace be with you!" 27Then he said to Thomas, "Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe."
28Thomas said to him, "My Lord and my God!"
----------------------
When this is provided to me, I'll believe.
Other gods or religions, let me know and I'll develop a proof I'll accept.
===================
It's not so much the touching -- it's that the wounds Yshua bar-Ysef allegedly would have been suffering would be gushing wounds, and fatal (specifically the spear-stab). So his standing before me with such wounds would be pretty difficult to duplicate, sufficiently so I believe it would not be unfair to say impossible, especially if he threw in a few other miracles on top of it.
2007-04-13 10:24:53 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Why do you need to be proving something to someone? If someone doesn't believe you, that's their business.
As far as someone convincing me of the existence of a certain God that they believe in, I'd pretty much have to see him or her for myself; sober. Any other attempts at proving it are just too easily fabricated/contrived.
2007-04-13 10:19:49 · answer #5 · answered by veronicaodden 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't think anything could convince me that there was a god, so I choose not to believe. Saying that I don't suppose there is anything that would proove without a doubt that there wasn't a god but I still choose not to believe.
2007-04-13 10:21:39 · answer #6 · answered by dxdad27 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You mean God Or god? god (small g) is ability an idle and also you'd be precise ... yet in case you meant GOD with capital G then that's what I truly ought to assert: How can the Bible be an evidence adversarial to God ? the bible is defined because the note of God; God himself in written type....... and the note itself is God... in case you even examine The Bible you'll see the e book of JOHN a million:a million contained in the starting up replaced into the note, and the note replaced into with God, and the note replaced into God all you want is to imagine seriously
2016-12-03 23:49:27 · answer #7 · answered by thetford 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Proof of what?
2007-04-13 10:16:41 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Proof is something that is irrefutable
2007-04-13 10:18:37 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋