Quote:
|
Originally Posted by KenWittlief
Tristan,
Good question. How could you possibly know for sure?
If the God of Judiasm and Christianity is real, exactly as it has been reportedly communicated to us by the people who interacted with Him
then, what proof of His existance, and His character would you (personally) accept?
what would you consider acceptable proof?
|
Well, to begin with, it would be necessary to establish what traits (etc.) have been attributed to that particular God, so that we would have a basis for comparison. In doing so, it would be very useful to ascertain which reported communications were from reliable sources, and which were not (after all, we want our basis of comparison to be accurate). Once we know what the working definition of God is—and I realize the inherent difficulty of the task, given the many interpretations of God's nature—we could then progress to testing a significant number of these traits, to see if they are compatible with our model.
But even if we've shown that these things
could be godly traits, we're only part of the way there. We must additionally try to show that they
are possesed by the god in question, since it is possible that other factors may have had a coincedental result. We would minimize this step by testing traits (if any exist) that are unique to God, and not possible through other means—of course, finding such a trait is rather problematic, given that any other omnipotent entity could potentially posess equivalent traits (unless we can show otherwise, either by definition or by example). Note that this step is crucial, and often forgotten: are you familar with instances where someone declares an event to have been miraculous, but in fact, a perfectly mundane explanation also existed?
Once some statistically significant amount of supporting evidence were achieved (I won't consider here how that statistical model would be defined and evaluated—I only have the faintest idea), with only a statistically small amount of counter-evidence, the proposition could be declared proven. (This is an empirical, scientific type of proof—it is not absolute, because we are generalizing based on a sample set of results; only by testing
everything, and having everything come out positive, could we be absolutely sure. This standard of proof doesn't exist when dealing with material things, as a practical consideration—all of science is based on variations upon the above method.)
But we aren't quite done yet. Now we need to make sure that we conducted our research dilligently and correctly; traditionally, this would involve peer review and duplication of findings. If others can reproduce the result, using the information and procedures described in the original study, it would tend to become accepted by the scientific community.
Then, I would accept it.
Is this standard of proof impractical? Well, for a god, of course it is. But gods' powers are very likely too broad to capture with a small quantity of evidence: how does one test the ability to create a world as described in Genesis? Isn't this capability fundamental to the nature of God as he is defined in Christian scripture? Isn't testing that well beyond our means as a civilization? The mere fact that we can't test it says nothing about the truth; all it says is that we simply don't know.
It comes down to this: we can't practically prove that a god exists, nor can we prove that no god exists. Don't conflate the fact that I have outlined an impractical scenario with an attempt to divert attention, or dodge the question; I have merely set the standard of proof at the same level demanded of any other scientific study. We must not accept an insufficient proof, simply because it is convienient, even if that means we cannot conclude at all; no conclusion is much more helpful than making the wrong conclusion.
In the absence of sufficient evidence of any gods, I therefore take the position that I don't know for sure whether or not any gods exist, and as a practical matter, do not acknowledge the existance of any, through religious ritual, or any other means.