COMMENTS AND DISCUSSIONS
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
Our subjects cover: religion (Christian, Jewish and others); diet and lifestyle (vegan and vegetarian); and other miscellaneous subjects.
The Proof of God
By: Ron Jump Ron@IFSS.org
The Institute of Formal Social Sciences IFSS Systematic Philosophy www.ifss.org
Submitted by Maynard S. Clark firstname.lastname@example.org 16 Sep 2000
Hi, All --
The best proof of God has been right under our mortal, fallible, finitely intelligent noses all the time. We all know that mankind did not create itself, and we know that this is the most important fact for a person to learn, in order to guide personal, autonomous conduct. Life is not up to us to decide, but to accept as a gift and to participate in it. Then with this realization one is oriented correctly, and one can begin to overcome self-centeredness and selfishness, and to understand the truth about being human.
We all want to help each other to understand this. It has been so as long as there have been people. Helping others to become well-oriented is a part of intelligent social life which is given to each of us as an individual member of a living species.
In the early times, long ago, people addressed the question in the somewhat prejudiced form of a loaded question. If man did not create itself, who did? That was as if there was someone else, a person not a person, a paradox. Even so, doing the best they could with their powers of expression in language, they expressed their answer in a name of the person who was not a person, rather than seem to deny the main fact that man did not create itself. If they could not answer, the question would seem to be a rhetorical assertion that man did create itself. So they gave an answer, by all means, even though it had something unsatisfactory about it, the paradox.
Aside from that little dialogue, meanwhile, the fact was becoming recognized in its own right that there is something prior to mankind in the events in the world, and that the origin of mankind could be attributed to it, along with all else. It could be seen quite obviously that things come to be and originate, and not always due to the actions of a person. The understanding of this creative process in the world grew, and both the process and the understanding of it were highly respected.
Thus there were two ways of addressing the subject of the preconditional situation in which human life occurred. One was a little bit of dialogue, and the other was an extensive body of knowledge, a whole culture. And certainly what it meant, in itself, was that dialogue between people was not the origin of all things, and something made up for the purpose of dialogue was pretty obviously suspect of being wrong, and was dubious. On second thought they began to ask if the dialogue version was really true or not. Then they felt the original strain that had been felt in the dialogue, that to say it is false would be to insinuate, at least, in some rhetorical way, that man was the creator of all things. It seemed either way to give in to the idea that everything is made by a person, even though we can see things originating naturally without a person in the role of maker.
This had all the makings of an impasse. It instituted a controversy. On one side it seemed obligatory to propound a position containing much that was difficult to hold as an intelligent opinion, and to risk being taken for one who thought that saying so was good enough, and believing was good enough, without any supporting reasoning or confirming evidence. The other side just snickered and pointed a finger, saying it would not be caught in such a position.
Now with this picture in mind, let's settle the controversy so that we do not have to go on wasting time with it. If we can separate it from the immature folly of establishing our egos by contrast with each other that thrives on disagreement, we can make quick work of settling the squabble:
The other side is the proof. There is a proof of the concept intended by the name, "God". The proof is science. It shows beyond any doubt and in great abundance of facts and reasoning that there is a prior origin of things before any human creativity, and explains the origin of man to be as we all wish to assert to have been not from man itself but from a prior source.
There. Done! The deed is done. The idea intended by all sincere and honest religion is supplied with proof that is incontrovertible and perfectly convincing. No doubt about it, all the ancient fables about something prior to man were right, and righteously intended. Moreover, anyone with the least competence in the use of language can accept the slight liberty with the use of words that was used as an interim measure in a dialogue in which it was important to find some way to avoid seeming to say the opposite of the truth.
Who made the pictures of crystal formations on the window? Jack Frost. Who left the coin under the child's pillow? The Tooth Fairy. Who put all those presents under the Christmas tree? Santa Claus.
Now we can understand that our neighbors are not all deluded and feeble-minded. They are just speaking in a conventional rhetorical mode that is different from our everyday practical mode of speaking strictly in literal facts. It deserves to be spoken of in a different way because it is not our business. Rather we are speaking of that whose business we are. We can not compare with it, nor rival it, in the farthest reaches of our imaginations. It deserves to be spoke of with awe, and in inflated rhetoric. It can not be captured in ordinary practical terms.
Extraordinary as that is, we do not need to doubt it. Our ability to explain things is not what makes them real. Something can be real but inexplicable. And even though we have this great difficulty explaining it, we can find it proven by all we do know, which may not reveal its character in any way that can be bounded into an identity of a person. We have the proof that it is real.
--Ron Jump Ron@IFSS.org The Institute of Formal Social Sciences IFSS Systematic Philosophy www.ifss.org
| Home Page | Archive | Discussion Table of
Watercolor painting by Mary T. Hoffman - God's Creation in Art
Thank you for visiting all-creatures.org.