Empirical proof of "God."

Philosophy Forums Religion and Spirituality
21

I have read most of the books you have, so am I allowed to define God now or do you want to continue defining God for me?

This is the essence of the problem: We have people declaring that this “God” we must worship is “beyond” our understandings of an empirical universe, but then they turn right around and claim to understand it. :confused:

That’s my point. You can set here and tell me that I cannot define “God” as being the universe but I encounter this divinity everyday and the evidence of this divine entity outweighs considerably such pretentious and hollow claims that you demand I favor.

So please, continue to explain why your definition of “God” is better because it encompasses concepts which we are ignorant of (yet somehow you are not ignorant of such matters) while I define God based upon what we understand and admit a limitation of understanding.

Your definition claims to understand more than we understand. Completely redundant, but to each their own.

22

If you encounter divinity everyday, then you qualify as mystic. Your understanding of divinity comes from your own personal experience.

As I said, “Your own personal meeting with the divine far outweighs any other evidence that I, or anyone else could ever provide you.”

There is nothing more for me to say.

23

At least this explanation of God escapes the infinite regression problem that most believers are stuck with. This elephant doesn’t support the world on his back opening up the question what is the elephant standing on. Rather this elephant is the world. At least it stops with the elephant. Or does it?