Does God Exist?
~ The Official Position of the
Church of Reality ~
|
Is there a God? How do we determine if God exists or not? First - let me define God so that we are all talking about the same being. The God I'm talking about is:
- The omnipotent being who is all powerful and created the universe.
- God is invisible - but he is everywhere - and he knows everything - even our thoughts.
- God hasn't showed up in physical form - out in public for at least 2000 years - longer if you are Jewish - 150 years if you are Mormon.
- God could show up any where at any time in any form if he wanted to, but he doesn't.
- God is infinitely wise.
- God knows the future and everything is going according to God's plan.
So - are we talking about the same God? Are we on the same page on this? If so - what conclusions can we draw?
Well - we know that God can come out - but he doesn't That means he chooses not to. He could write a new updated Bible - maybe even publish it on the web - but he doesn't - and he chooses not to.
God could come out in public - but he doesn't. Therefore he chooses not to.
People claim to have a personal relationship with God, and that God reveals himself individually to people who open up to him. But I have observed that those who seem to truly believe they have a personal relationship with God are getting very different messages. Some are getting a peace and love message while others are being called to arms to fight a holy war against other people who believe God is on their side supporting their cause. I therefore have to believe that some of these people if not all of them just think God is talking to them when he really isn't.
God apparently doesn't reveal himself to realists like me. God could reveal himself to me - but he chooses not to. And even if he did reveal himself to me personally - that doesn't qualify him as real to the Church of Reality. I am after all just a guy with an idea. I do not control reality. God doesn't become real based on the belief of Marc Perkel. In order to qualify as real to the church of Reality - God have to come out in an objective form that everyone can observe in the real world.
There is a possibility that God exists and that he is deliberately concealing himself for us faithless Realists and that it is his will that people like me never find him. If that is the case - then it is the will of God that realists like myself don't believe in him and that God is in control and that we Realists are doing exactly what we are supposed to do under God's plan.
The standard for reality in the Church of Reality is that for us to declare something is (probably) real - it has to be something that is objectively observable in the real world by any observer. Personal revelation does not meet this test. So - even if I were to personally believe in God - that isn't good enough for the Church of Reality. We are committed to believing in reality the way it really is.
The official position of the Church of Reality is that God does not exist until such time as God chooses to reveal himself to all Realists and come out into objective reality in the real world.
It is therefore the official position of the Church of Reality that God does not exist until such time as God chooses to reveal himself to all Realists and comes out into objective reality in the real world. Should God come out into the real world then we as Realists will instantly become theists and will do whatever God commands us to do. Until that happen then either God does not exist or it is God's will that Realists don't believe in him. Either way - this is the correct choice. Except for the burning in Hell forever part - but I suppose that too is God's will because if he exists he must be in control and this is his plan.
It's not up to the Church of Reality to prove God doesn't exist. It is up to theists to prove he does.
I will state right now that if I ever become a theist without an objective real world test proving the existence of God - then I have lost my mind and I am no longer qualified to hold a leadership position in the Church of Reality. I do not have the authority to declare God exists unless God can be objectively perceived by all members of the Church of Reality. |
People have asked me - "What would God have to do to make you believe in him? What would it take to make you a believer?" Well - that's easy. There are a lot of things God could do. All it has to do is show up and perform some miracle that is clearly beyond the ability of any human to fake. For example - God could lift up a mountain - or - it could talk in a big booming voice where everyone on the planet heard it at once. After all - if you are omnipotent and created the universe it seems to me that proving you are God is a trivial matter. So clearly God could do it - it's not doing it - so therefore it either doesn't exist or it is hiding and doesn't want to be found. I have "faith" that if God exists that it is capable of convincing me it is real.
I am Marc Perkel. I exist. I am real. And no one is seriously questioning that. I am accepted as real because I have a phone number and I answer it. I appear in public. I have a web site, and email address, a Social Security Number, a drivers license with my picture on it. I am registered to vote. I appear on Television and Radio and do interviews. I go to lunch with people. I have a checking account. People can see, hear, smell, touch, and for the privileged few, taste me. So if I can be accepted as real then why can't God? Surely God can do everything I can do, can't he? Unless he isn't real or deliberately hiding. And if God is deliberately hiding and we can't find him, who's fault is that?
Some people are saying - "Well, if God actually showed up - no one would believe in him." Speaking for myself and all the Realists I know if God actually did show up - we would all instantly believe in it. God should come out of hiding and give it a try. We are Realist so if God shows up, we are become believers. |
This article on Ignosticism comes from Wikipedia and does an excellent job of expressing the Position of the Church of Reality on God. We are focused on what does exist. What doesn't exist is unimportant to us.
Because God has no consistent definition we can't reach the question of existence.
Ignosticism is the view that the question of the existence of God is meaningless because it has no verifiable (or testable) consequences and should therefore be ignored. (See scientific method.) The term was coined by Rabbi Sherwin Wine, founder of the Society for Humanistic Judaism. Ignosticism is often considered synonymous with theological noncognitivism.
In the entry under "God" in the Guide to Humanistic Judaism, published by the Society for Humanistic Judaism, ignosticism is defined as "finding the question of God's existence meaningless because it has no verifiable consequences." This use of the term verifiable is consistent with the usage of logical positivism and indicates that the word "God" is meaningless because theism is incoherent. This doesn't have to imply, however, that the idea of God is emotionally or aesthetically meaningless. It is sufficient to say that the idea of God as a being makes no sense.
For most purposes, this view may be considered a form of agnosticism (sometimes referred to as "apathetic agnosticism"), and falls under the general category of nontheism. But it is a particular form. From this approach, the "I don't know" of agnosticism ceases to mean "I don't know if God exists or not" and becomes "I don't know what you're talking about when you talk about God." This underlies the form of the word: ignosticism, indicating an ignorance of what is meant by a claim of God's existence. Until this ignorance is cleared up, the ignostic is justified in ignoring putative arguments for or against.
So, when the word "God" is spoken, the ignostic may seek to determine if something like a child's definition of a god is meant or if a theologian's is intended.
A child's concept generally has a simple and coherent meaning: a big powerful man in the sky responsible for the weather and other such matters. The ignostic is probably atheistic toward this notion, regarding the balance of evidence to deem against it. In taking this view the ignostic is in agreement not only with all atheists but, ironically, with any serious modern theist.
A theologian's concept is more complex and abstract, often involving such concepts as first cause, sustainer, and unmoved mover and claiming such attributes for God as omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent. To the ignostic these abstractions, taken singly or in combination, cannot be said to be false; rather, they are muddled, self-contradictory, linguistically empty, or perhaps poetic. Hence, one cannot meaningfully expound on the existence or nonexistence of God.
The Church of Reality awaits the point when the Theistic world comes up with a consistent definition of God.
The consistent ignostic, therefore, requires a coherent definition of God (or of any other metaphysical concept to be discussed) before engaging in arguments for or against. |
|
This web page replaces a more detailed but far more offensive web page that I (the First One) wrote on the same subject. I apologize in advance to people of faith for it being somewhat offensive and arrogant. But - some times I get off on a rant especially when I am surrounded by arrogant Christians trying to shove Jesus down my throat. If you read on you'll find my original rant that is more of a discussion than official church position. |
|
|
Does God Exist? 