Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 123456 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 67

Thread: Prove God exists, how?

  1. #11

    Re: Prove God exists, how?

    Morning, V:

    Quote Originally Posted by Vrindavan View Post
    Answering my son's question.

    My son think people believing in God is not Science and something not proved.
    No need to prove anything. Hinduism isn't Christianity or Islam. Such "can you prove God exists?" questions are of completely different, not to mention foreign, epistemic and ontological paradigms. Instead, "have you done your homework?" would be a befitting reply, quickly followed by "how was your day?".

  2. #12

    Re: Prove God exists, how?

    Namaste Vrindavan,

    Quote Originally Posted by Vrindavan View Post
    Answering my son's question.

    My son think people believing in God is not Science and something not proved.
    You could perhaps recommend to your Son, that God is a conjecture and not a Proof.
    The "evidence" or Proof of which, is perceived when following the advise and framework given by those who have experienced before us; as is the very definition of scientific experiment. You might then explain to him the difference between a conjecture and a proof, giving rise to the importance of understanding axioms, otherwise said, the limits of the reference frame of the observer and the system being used.

    This is fully reflected by current scientific conjecture, which states that a large percentage of the universe is invisible* or undetectable to us.

    Kind regards.

    *We have other senses than sight. - you might explain the corresponding tattva here.
    Last edited by Mana; 22 November 2014 at 11:22 AM.

  3. #13

    Re: Prove God exists, how?

    "What does the word God mean"?
    Long before I can prove or disprove God... we have to define what the word means.

    Otherwise it would be like the question: Can you prove the existence of dwindigole ?

    unless the word is well defined you cannot prove or disprove.

    Come up, O Lions, and shake off the delusion that you are a sheep

  4. #14
    Join Date
    September 2006
    Rep Power

    Re: Prove God exists, how?


    Quote Originally Posted by Vrindavan View Post

    Answering my son's question.
    My son think people believing in God is not Science and something not proved.
    First I think its a reasonable question. Yet one must ask : How old is your son ? What is his natural 'bent' ? That is, is he a simple person ? Scientific by nature ? Has he finished school and now pondering questions of a higher nature ? What is his ability to comprehend things that are abstract ? Does he or did he practice any worship ? What is his expecations of a 'right answer' to this question ?

    As I have found with many questions of this nature, it turns into a game called 'bring me rock'.
    The person asks, bring me a rock. So, you deliver a rock. Then the person says, oh I wanted one without sharp edges. So you fetch one with that quality. Then he says, oh but I wanted it to be blue. So you find one blue. Then he says , yes, that is blue but a bit darker blue. You find the blue rock. Then he says, oh yes, that is blue, with no sharp corners, but it needs to be a bit bigger rock.

    As you can see this can become a frustrating exercise. Hence one needs to be sure the person really wants a rock, and get a clear understanding of his/her needs. I have been in this situation often - 'please tell me who this God is'. So, before playing 'bring me a rock' I try and lay out some of the terms, defintions I wish to enter into the conversation and make sure they are acceptable to the person. Acceptable means , they are comprehended and prove ( I hope ) benefical to the conversation.
    This occured just yesterday... The person I was talking with was my senior and with great interest in the wisdom of sanAtana dharma. I took time ( a few days) before answering his question, as we spoke for a few days , 1 hr. at a time.

    Yet the final answer to our conversation for this person, at his age, understanding, comprehension level, and ability to simulate this knowledge was that the Supreme is unspeakable. All that we will discuss about this Supreme will be the best approximation a human can talk of to another human. This set the stage for a fruitful conversation. It also suggestd that I was not the final authorty on this matter and some 'research' on his side was in order. Research for this 78 year man was knowledge + experience. He took it upon himself to move forward on this.

    Would this be the best course of action for some one 10 years of age ? 15 years ? 20 years of age ? One can say , it all depends on the qualification of the student asking.

    So, we all want to help. We all want to explain the light of the Supreme.... this is a good thing. Yet the knowledge as I see it needs to be metered out based upon the student. One needs to consider is there passing curiosity ( window shopping) or genine interest. This IMHO suggests how intently a person will listen.

    ... painted cakes do not satisfy hunger.

    iti sivam
    Last edited by yajvan; 22 November 2014 at 02:20 PM.
    यतस्त्वं शिवसमोऽसि
    yatastvaṁ śivasamo'si
    because you are identical with śiva


  5. #15

    Re: Prove God exists, how?


    I hope this thread continues longer as it one that I like, it has importance.

    The first question to the scientists, is he studying within science something greater than himself.

    The question also has to be looked at especially in the west from a Historical point of view and how science arrived at the point it is now.

    Then we need to look at what type of God they deny, if it is one of the Bible, and no disrespect to that doctrine but that is what they mostly refute. This again falls into a subject of History. The bible is a book of faith, science is not about faith.

    Then we can add how much does science really know about matter, what to speak of consciousness.

    It is a tricky debate in the west, but they have missed out some vital areas of research, i.e themselves



  6. #16

    Re: Prove God exists, how?


    Quote Originally Posted by yajvan View Post
    ... Would this be the best course of action for some one 10 years of age ? 15 years ? 20 years of age ? One can say , it all depends on the qualification of the student asking.
    Age is a curious notion, I worked for a long while as a portrait photographer working mostly with children; it is very clear from a very young age, the enormous expanse between the differing states of awareness of the children, and from a very young age.
    It would seem to me, that the schools of Occidental education will try to assimilate all children with each other; as though trying to convince them that they are all the same and then test them against a linear scale, when they are clearly not such.

    From such a foundation it is very difficult to analyse anything objectively; ones subjective view has already been badly obscured; leaving the child ill equipped to understudy even the most simple premise of both science and philosophy; should this is done to all, then who would notice?

    As you rightly mention Md:
    It is a tricky debate in the west, but they have missed out some vital areas of research, i.e themselves
    Then there is also the subject of time passed since realisation of that ... and then eventually, of time its self.

    Now it seems ludicrous to me try to prove the existence of God; we must first find who we are, before we can understand and analyse our surroundings.
    That we might become concious of God, then becomes a real possibility.

    Kind regards.
    Last edited by Mana; 24 November 2014 at 02:07 AM.

  7. #17

    Re: Prove God exists, how?


    The question was asked by Vrindavan Ji, so obviously he does not know how to answer. The modern scientific model is more or less run by Atheists, check out Dawkins confusion to how a person of faith cannot be a scientist. (biting my lip to not say Bigot ... )

    They have strong propaganda based on empirical logic and observation, religion has empirical logic and observation too, samkhya, but within the paradigm of religion the property of consciousness is at the center, where as in empirical science they are trying to find consciousness through empirical means, although the scientist are often to dull to notice that without consciousness there could be no empirical observation, the simple difference between a living body and dead body.

    The religious quest is to explore what is consciousness, most eastern religions will start from this premise and then further explore through practice and becoming versed in the mass amount of wonderful literature.

    We need to identify what empirical science is, the study of phenomena and then we need to identify the study of religion ( dharma) which is a self study, or the study of the nature of consciousness.

    Throughout known Vedic civilizations and perhaps before the recorded period of Vedas in written form the cultured man (sadhu, rishi, yogi) had no problem with the study of both phenomena and consciousness, so they include a more complete approach to knowledge.

    If that balance is not aligned then we have a type of chaos, religious fanaticism and blind materialism, both of which lead to a type of hellish existence.

    The answer is actually quite simple, keep studying all forms of knowledge, keep an open mind, there are elements of truth in all of the information we study, some have deeper meaning which can be understood by the depth of our understanding, the main thing is not be caught up dogmas, and if the Modern Atheist says he has no dogma and that only belongs to religion then he is either ignorant or dishonest.

    Some people say that Dharmic paths is not a science, this is just not true, it may not be the type of science that fits into the modern education system, but at least some credit should be given that it is scientific in its approach. The problem with science now is that they have some how or another brainwashed everyone to think that the subjective experience is not that important, and when it is, its study is done in an objective way, ridiculous, and these people are considered top of the chain in intelligentsia , this is the biggest error for modern science to be considered in its existing format the main authority in the field of knowledge.

    Things are much better now in some ways than before, maybe that balance is closer to coming to the harmony that is essential. Also the scientist need to be more honest in the way they have taken many things from ancient cultures and then claimed it as there own because of the way they fashion it, usually for prestige, money and noble prizes.


    Last edited by markandeya 108 dasa; 27 November 2014 at 01:47 PM.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    November 2010
    London UK
    Rep Power

    Smile Re: Prove God exists, how?

    I welcome comments and would like to point out before I begin, that my intention isn't to deliberately offend anyone; nevertheless I know that I will.

    Personally, I find the question to be quite pertinent and I think the answer lies in something slightly deeper than the chasm between religion and science.

    Language plays a very major part in ideas about faith and belief. Primarily, it's the confusion about the meaning of words, and the gaps in definitions that allow unscientific concepts to creep in. For example, there is no common perception of a god. Every believer has a unique identity that they ascribe to their chosen deity. Furthermore even attributes that are supposedly assigned to these deities, which have been criticised and scrutinised for ages, are so badly defined that the believers are left with their own imagination to work out what they are. Take the case of Hindu believers who believe in the one cosmic creative force "Brahman" and its offshoots Brahma, Vishnu, Mahesh; the fact that already their are people here who are thinking of rebuttals to this model of Hinduism tells you how ill-defined these ideas really are.

    These discrepancies are shared across faiths and religions. Some people try and posit a delineation between literalist reading of certain scriptures and "feeling the presence of God while not relying upon scripture too much". This of course is a fatuous argument as those who follow this line of reasoning fail to provide evidence that proves that they are the arbiters of how to believe in a given religion.

    So I would actually like to answer your question with a few other questions that I hope will highlight the reasons why any thinking person cannot believe in a God -

    - Who is this God that you believe in?
    - If this God is undefined and indefinable - then isn't it akin to saying God is nahdkfmfbjwlaakakeo, I.e. white noise?
    - How did you come to believe in the God that you believe in?
    - Did you give every faith a fair chance by learning the tenets of each religion, before deciding which religion to follow? I.e. if you're not a Muslim/Christian/Buddhist/Scientologist what criteria did you use to discard these candidates for the position of ultimate truth?
    - Did you use this same criteria against the faith you do follow? Or was that more of a legacy you inherited from your parents?
    - If you're a non-denominational believer/deist, what led you to the belief in a creator of the universe?
    - What is your starting point when it comes to the supernatural? Do you begin with a scientific starting point of the null hypothesis, which means that any hypothesis is considered false unless proven true. Or do you believe arbitrarily that the idea of God merits agnosticism? Do you feel the same way towards ghosts, leprechauns, witches, goblins, fairies and unicorns?
    - How does your God fair against Euthyphro's dilemma?

    Looking forward to replies. :-)

  9. #19

    Re: Prove God exists, how?


    If its a case of language your after to define the religious experience then perhaps if you have not read this it may shed some light



  10. #20
    Join Date
    September 2007
    Rep Power

    Re: Prove God exists, how?

    Vannakkam Vrindavan: Your son is right, in that we can not prove the existence of God, in logical terms.

    It's outside logic and the intellect, and that's where most of his experiences have been, I'm guessing. My suggestion would be to take him on a pilgrimage to India to one of the thronging temples. He needs to have the opportunities to experience the bhakti for God. He may not feel it himself, but he may then have the opportunity to feel watch others who do.

    In the meantime, you can set an example for him, and give an alternate view whenever he speaks of atheism.

    Good luck at giving him such an experience.

    Aum Namasivaya

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Brahman, Prakriti and Jivas per Dvaita
    By wundermonk in forum Dvaita
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 07 January 2012, 08:01 PM
  2. The incomparability of Hinduism
    By Kumar_Das in forum Dvaita
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 15 June 2011, 04:31 AM
  3. VOID Void void
    By bhaktajan in forum Canteen
    Replies: 140
    Last Post: 14 November 2009, 11:31 PM


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts