Resolved - God exists

Intro: Epistemology is the study of knowledge. What is the necessary and sufficient conditions of knowledge? What are it's sources? limits? etc. (1) There is more than 1 way to gain knowledge, but regardless we will always have limits to our knowledge. Because of this, i will describe the pros and cons of each different kind of method to create a coherent "self-correcting" system and gain further knowledge. Is truth objective or subjective? Both, we can only subjectively know the truth based on our natural senses and experiences. Science is subjective because in order to discover a scientific answer, you are required to restrict yourself to using the scientific method. How do we know truth? 1) Evidence from fields such as science, archaeology, etc. 2) experience 3) logic. 1. Evidence - Evidence which comes from various fields such as science can be used to be a bit more objective than experience and relies on inductive reasoning to gain it's knowledge of truth. ex: Doing a scientific study on the effects of weed on humans by testing select volunteers. The limits of this method is that it's not absolute truth. It's inductive reasoning, but does not always apply to all circumstances. Ex: You can infer that all humans die, but if you have find one immortal human, your conclusion is false. 2) Experience - we only have our senses and mind to gain knowledge of truth and reality ex: concluding humans exist by observing them The limits of this is that although it's on direct observation, it cannot be applied to gain objective and truthful knowledge of reality. ex: I cannot use my experience of an alien abductions to prove to you that aliens exist3) Logic - You can deductively come to a logical conclusion from premises. Ex: If Larry is sick, then he will be absent.If Larry is absent, then he will miss his classwork.Therefore, if Larry is sick, then he will miss his classwork. (2) The limits of this is that it's all subjective in the mind and requires objective experience on observations on realityex: You get from observations that absence equals the missing of classwork because of how society is structured. These can all be used to find God's existence provided that each one is used correctly. Definition of God: Which God? How should we evaluate which religion is "right"? Logically, all cannot be right. 1. Monotheism claims there is only one God 2. Polytheism claims there are many gods 3. Conclusion: neither can be absolute truth Compared to "God", our limits have been set so that we cannot know anything beyond this physical realm. We can only use evidence, logic, and experience to gain knowledge. Although this may not apply to all religions, it applies to some. For example, if the Christian God created the universe, everything in the universe must harmonize with him. If we find something to disprove his "Word" (Bible) or demonstrate that a particular religion is derived from another, he would be contradicted (ex. Mormonism is derived from the Bible, so it's likely to be fabrication). When we encounter an experience of a specific deity (Revelation, voice, vision, miracle, etc.) that we would not previous know, it then becomes something i call a "divine experience." It then becomes clear that the existence of that specific deity exists and his Word is truth (Bible,Koran. etc.) There are two ways to get in contact with the divine 1) Anticipating an experience with the supernatural 2) Practicing the religion's method of discovering God in order to find his existence (ex. Bible implies we reach God through faith and prayer) 3) Finding evidence within a particular religion to make an inference that the supernatural is at work (ex. finding that biblical prophecies have been consistently fulfilled. If the cause cannot be identified, it leaves God as the simplest explanation.) I will list a few counter-arguments people present against God's existence 1. "There are many cases of people 'feeling' that unicorns exist, it doesn't imply that we should believe in God." Depending on the kind of perception you have God, if it is more direct than "feeling" unicorns, you have more certainty that it's true.Ex: I had a revelation from God as i heard a voice with a presence causing me to recognize him as God tell me that Jesus was the only way to salvation. That's more direct experience involving a voice, revelation, presence, etc. than just "feeling" 2. Some try to use evidence in an attempt to explain away the supernatural directly, however in order for you to do that, you must have extensive knowledge of how those explanations would work in natural situations. Ex: You cannot do a psychological diagnosis on God if he is immaterial, omnipotent, and omniscient. 3. Can we all come to the conclusion that God exists? Is there any sort of experience or evidence to demonstrate it? Yes, my family all come from a Christian background, but have split in half. One half is Christian and the other atheistic/agnostic. However, we all have had divine experiences. One family member who's identity shall remain hidden openly admits that she knows that God exists based on hearing his voice and knowing more of his attributes (ex: love, benevolence, etc.) Does that imply that anyone who knows God exists will automatically convert? No, she knows God exists, but she did not convert for personal reasons and not agreeing with the Bible's system of morality. Just as i know that you exist, but just because i know you exist, doesn't mean that i have to befriend you and acknowledge your existence. I have plenty more to say on the subject, but for now, this is my opening argument. Sources: 1. http://plato.stanford.edu...2. http://en.wikipedia.org...