Theist Challenge! What is a property that defines existence? Does God meet that property?

Question

(Repost)

For example when I say I have a hand, properties which include/define me having a hand is.

* It is attached to my arm
* It has veins and blood running through it
* It has fingers... etc... etc... etc...

1 property that I use to define existence is that which is in spacetime. I have many others but am eager to hear your defining properties.

My claim is that no theist can give me a property which is an adequate attribute of existence that applies to Himself and God.
The statement "I exist, and God exist" is not compatible. Because the properties which define existence apply to one "I" but not to the other "God"?

One way of surpassing semantics and getting to the root meanings of "certain" terms is to define the properties of that term. At times simple definitions will not do we have to get to the properties. Once we do this it is clear that the statement "God exists" is meaningless.

Or perhaps I`am mistaken and a theist will prove me wrong?

For those that think my property of existence is limited to thing of a physical make up - answer this. Does time and space have a physical make up? Does not time and space exist in all things and in eachother?

Needless to say no theist as of yet has met this challenge - or giving a description of existence which is consistent with a being that created everything yet is seperate and distinct from it.

St. Bonafice - Until you describe what a spirit is - talking about such things is meaningless. And are we not spirtual beings as well - yet still bound by the laws of nature? Your argument is null and void.

Answer 1

God has the same properties that all the other imaginary things have.

Edit -- I want to know what experience of other non-physical beings these people have had. If we don't have any evidence for non-physical beings at all, why believe that they exist?

I also want to know how these people think a being could exist outside of space and time. I would argue that a being that takes up no space and exists for no period of time, simply does not exist. Even if we imagine a "magical" being that could exist in this manner, how does a being not situated in space affect things in space? One needs to be located in space in order to stand in relation to other things in space, and subsequently affect them.

Answer 2

Howe could that be answered? Does my inability to know and explain the nature of an eternal God mean He does not exist? no, all it means is that I cannot describe or explain properties. Obviously His properties would not be physical, and not confined to space/time. But eternity is not confined to space time. What is the nature of eternity? It is a nonsensical question. But that He exists all of the Universe proclaims.

Your statement about me existing and God existing is naive--saying that one cannot exist if the other does. Just because properties of my exisistence apply to me and not to God (if you are correct, not taking into account the idea of a spirit/soul) does not mean that God does not alsoexist but have different properties or attributes of existence. one does not rule out the other. The reason you have not found theists who can answer you is not because God is not real but because either (1) We jsut cannot know or (2) (and most likely, with no offence intended) the question itself is not not answerable for various reasons.

Answer 3

I think you assume yourself to be well-versed in epistemology and the philosophy of knowledge. It's interesting that someone would go to such lengths to prove the non-existence of something (which, if it doesn't exist, shouldn't actually matter to them at all, no?)

I'm not nearly as well-informed on the subject, but what I've considered in my head is that because God has given properties to objects, then He himself is not subject to the requirement of having properties--especially those existing WITHIN space and time. God exists outside of that.

Apart from that, I don't think it's acceptable to rely on the theory of "existence based on properties", because, as any other sources of knowledge/ways of knowing, it has a limited scope. Who are we to assume everything can be described by properties and accepted by our few-pound brains?

Sorry if that doesn't completely answer the question, but for some reason some part of me has a feeling that there is a fallacy in there somewhere, although I haven't gone to the trouble of searching for it.

Interesting challenge, but not valid, I think.

Answer 4

This is an excellent question and goes to the heart of the dilemma that all theists face. I doubt you'll have any responses to your challenge from any theists.

Edit: It looks like the best you get is a latter day ''St Boniface'' who can still only argue from the position that faith is superior to reason. It's environmentally friendly, I suppose, seeing it's a recycling of the arguments of Thomas Aquinas, Gertrude of Helfta and Augustine, with a bit Ignatius of Loyola thrown in for good measure. I just love a good pre-twentieth century defence of religion.

Answer 5

Intelligence. But one has to understand what it is to know how it is a property, the property of all that we are made up from. The glory of God is intelligence. And spirit is matter. It just cannot be viewed with the naked eye.

Answer 6

Your hypothesis does not apply because God is a Spiritual Being. What physical property can you attach to something that is spiritual? Nothing.

The existence or non-existence of God cannot be proved or disproved scientifically. At best we can cite certain scientific laws and theories (big bang, second law of thermodynamics, DNA etc.), which indicate the existence of God. There can be no scientific proof, simply because God is not physical or material. He is spiritual and infinite.

But if we broaden our notion of science to include knowledge of things that we get from observing their effects on other things, then God can be known from science.

It is a doctrine of the Church that faith does not come to us through reason alone, but by the grace of God. If a person opposes even the possibility of God's existence, then any arguments or evidence can be rationalized away.

I believe in a personal God from personal experience. It is like faith, hope and love. We know they are true but we cannot prove them concretely. It is the same thing with God. I feel his presence in the situations and circumstances I find myself in. That's how God communicates to me. I also know God loves me through the blessings (in the form of opportunities) he gives me. That's how I know God exists. I don’t need any concrete proof.

Open you heart, mind, and soul to God’s grace and you too will find Him.

Answer 7

Oh boy, you're asking a question that requies actual thought! Don't expect a lot of responses that actually make sense...but great question, nonetheless!

Answer 8

I don't have an answer, but I really like this question.