These were the questions:
(1) What do you mean by "God"?
(2) Does it have distinct characteristics?
(3) Are those characteristics justified?
(4) Are those characteristics internally consistent?
(5) Are they consistent with the world?
(6) Are they consistent with your feelings?
(7) Are feelings a reliable way of knowing?
(8) Is there a reliable way of knowing?
(1) What do you mean by "God"?
Well first of
all, it is impossible to know God completely. We know what he has revealed and
proven to us; we conjecture about other qualities of God. First and foremost
the most fundamental thing in the universe is God. God is not contained by the
universe, he created and contains it. Any sort of absolute truth, any sort of
dependable reality you seek is God. Good and evil/bad are defined as things
which are in accordance or dissonance with this fact: God exists. He is
infinitely powerful, all-knowing, present everywhere, unchangeable (though he
acts differently in different situations), and perfectly loyal to his own glory
(as he ought to be) and is justified in being so. He is the only being in the
universe that gets to be self-congratulatory.
(2) Does it have distinct characteristics?
It would probably
be helpful if you elaborated on what you mean (especially your next question
about how these characteristics are justified). However, I will do what I can.
As mentioned in
the last question, he’s omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, and unchanging. He’s
also omni-benevolent (all-good), but that’s rather a moot point considering we
defined goodness based on God anyway.
a) He has
millions of characteristics because he is an infinitely complex being, and we
only know a few of them. He is more complex than a human personality, and can
be thought of as a composition of multiple personalities (the father, son, and
holy spirit). One way to express his many qualities is through names. God has
many names, including things like Jehovah-jireh (God will provide), the Lamb of
God (Jesus paying for our sins), and the Counselor (the holy spirit). He
possesses all of these qualities simultaneously and never acts in contradiction
to one in favor of another (e.g. his justice vs. his mercy). This may seem
blatantly incorrect – please
let me know and I’ll explain if you wish (or look at my blog posts regarding
free will). All of his qualities are perfect in quantity and quality, work
together perfectly, and he has the perfect/complete number of them.
b) There are two
qualities which I think deserve specific mention – his holiness and his love. His holiness simply means that he is far
greater and different than everything else in the universe. He is unique and
worthy of praise. This is why he can want his own glory – he deserves it. Second is his love. Love
has been defined in many ways, but I think the best is that of making selfless
actions for the benefit of another. In this sense God is necessarily love and
many if not all of his other qualities are bound up in love, for anyone’s
benefit (including Gods) is defined by goodness, which is defined by God. The
best thing that can be done towards a person is to direct them to the ultimate
good, which is God, and as God always glorifies himself, all his actions are
loving. This is not such a cold thing as it sounds for again, truly the best
thing that can be done for a person is to direct them to God. If they can only
focus on God when their stomach is full or have been touched by the gentleness
and kindness of God, then love entails such kind acts.
(3) Are those characteristics justified?
I assume that you
mean ‘can you justify your belief in those characteristics?’. From here I could
take the discussion two ways – I could
go on to support the existence of God himself or support the existence of his
characteristics. I guess I’ll do both at least briefly.
a) There are so
many realms of study that can be used to support Gods existence – cosmic physics, subatomic physics,
humanities/sociology (human tendencies and desires), archeology/history,
biology, psychology, perceptions/metaphysics, the consistency of the bible,
explanatory power, practical usage, miracles, and personal experience are the
ones that have come to mind so far. Many of these I claim may independently
prove the existence of the supernatural, God, and even the Christian God. Some
of the science I have already described. You can see my blog for ’16 arguments
for the existence of God’ or ‘TSM’. TSM is my term for arguments based on the
limits of timespace and matter complexity. If you wish to dive into these let
me know and we’ll go there, but I think two areas in particular are worth
mentioning – personal experience and miracles. For
personal experience please see section 7, but for miracles keep reading.
bi) Miracles are
an entirely different matter. I believe they still happen today. I think I
performed one myself, actually. I prayed for a man who’d been hurt by the
church and by all appearances wasn’t a Christian. He’d been experiencing
debilitating stomach pain for the last three months so I prayed for healing.
Four days later I spoke with him and he said the pain was gone. Because he was
a nonbeliever, I assume no bias, and because the pain was debilitating and
going on for 3 months, I see no placebo effect or medical coincidence.
Of course these
things cannot be replicated - no more than you can replicate an earthquake, an
artists inspiration, or the United States decision to go to war in Iraq.
However they can be experienced, recorded in some fashion, and retold.
bii) I typed “medical
miracle evidence” into google and the second thing I found was this http://www2.wspa.com/lifestyles/2009/apr/23/medical_miracles-ar-17589/
Feel free to dig around on your own. This one showcases Bill Pitts, a man of
faith diagnosed with stage 4 colon cancer who was released to spend out his
last days in peace but is now clean of cancer. It also cites statistics of
prayer and faith increasing the likelihood of miracles and health. A second one
http://www.doxa.ws/other/Miracles.html
has many examples and is reasonably rigorous with a number of the miracles
(including resurrections), though I admit few are as concrete as I could hope.
As I sit here at the computer, my mother related that she went through a period
of life working on floor 9 East in the general neurological department of the
St. Paul Ramsey Medical Center (now Regions Hospital). During this period she
seemed to have the gift of healing, praying for a number of people and seeing
some healed. For instance the ER sent her floor a patient whom they did not
expect to live through the elevator ride to the department. Immediately after
praying for her, the patient’s erratic heartbeat returned to normal and she got
up and began to make her own bed. The next day the lady walked out of the
hospital independently.
(4) Are those characteristics internally consistent?
Yes. That’s the
reason I’ve been so interested in free will/problem of evil stuff. If you have
any specific questions or inconsistencies you see, feel free to point them out.
(5) Are they consistent with the world?
Yes, that kind of
falls under general apologetics (arguments for the existence of God, the
Christian faith, and various theological points). If you see any specific
inconsistencies (like the problem of evil), feel free to point them out.
(6) Are they consistent with your feelings?
I don’t have many
feelings. Do you mean ‘are they consistent with your personal
spiritual/emotional experiences?’ Yes, I suppose. At first I was going to say
that they didn’t support each other much, but didn’t contradict. Then I was
going to say that they agree inasmuch as my emotional experiences (which I was
going to say are not purely fact and logic) can be compared to the qualities of
God. But perhaps this explains it best: the most consistent method of putting
me into a happy condition is to be reminded (by myself or something else) of
the properties of God. It is not an easy connection. Admitting that you are not
the center of the universe, being unselfish, accepting help from another is not
easy. In facts it’s extremely difficult- arguably the most difficult thing for
a human to do- impossible to do without God. However, being reminded of the
facts of God, how I am not God but yet God is so for me, so allied with me, so
passionate about relating to me, that it’s comforting anyway….. this brings me
so much peace I could die on the spot and not give a pennys care either way.
(7) Are feelings a reliable way of knowing?
Over time I have
been driven to accept that most Christians believe God based on personal ‘emotional‘
experience- and I’m not certain whether this is a bad thing or not. Here I
refer to not fickle emotions generated by circumstances, not desires of the
heart, but of impressions and feelings that seem to be so different from the
self that they ought to come from outside of the self. See, that’s what we
claim (or I claim) we experience, and it’s actually the only thing that might
be capable of communicating absolutely reliable truth. Nearly every other piece
of evidence or reasoning falls away when we consider that we could all be
inside the Matrix (thought honestly it’s so hard to conceive of something that
does not exist in timespace that TSM might still convince a lot of people that
God must exist, even outside the Matrix). Someone’s personal experience may be
of such a quality that they are certain it could not be produced by anything
other than God or some supreme being much greater than themselves. If you are
familiar with Rene Descartes method of doubt (Meditation on First Philosophy),
stage II describes how he can be certain that he is not alone in the universe
by the fact that he perceives things that are greater than he himself could
create. This is somewhat similar to the Christian experience, where they might
argue that what they have experienced is so independent of themselves and
anything they could create that some other force must have given it to them-
namely God. At this stage it only proves a supernatural being- nothing more
(and even then, of course, only for the person who has experienced it).
Again, should
this be our primary method of knowing that God exists? Eh. I guess so. In the
end in heaven God won’t be showing us how the universe proves he’s true.
I mean….. he’ll be sitting right there. We’ll experience him, love him,
etc. But as I may have said before, every conceivable method you can imagine
supports God, every division of science and such supports God if not proves him
(well, yes, people think evolution and the big bang are proven theories, that’s
an entirely different story.) Just pick one.
(8) Is there a reliable way of knowing?
a) Hm...I wonder
what you mean by reliable? Again, for all we know we could be in the Matrix.
...? What is strong enough to constitute reliable to you? Do I think I
know for certain? Eh..yes. Based on the living presence of God in my heart. I
guess I shouldn’t be sorry that’s the answer, but it is. It is, after all, the
only sure way of knowing considering the Matrix...
Think of it as a
little piece of A Priori evidence you carry around with you all the time. Like
a token in Inception. I mean, what better way to know that a person exists than
live your life holding his hand?
b) Miracles again
are pretty strong evidence – at least
of the supernatural. (We believe that sometimes ‘miracles’ can be performed
through demonic forces.)
c) I’m sorry this
is not a very strong or wholesome answer. Please define your question better
and I can answer it better.
No comments:
Post a Comment