Why can't God be proven?

[nobspeople]

Because of faith faith faith faith - ad nauseam - is normally the answer. But that's an excuse and doesn't really answer the question for many (including many believers if you listen to enough of them).
Surely, if God can create all that is, it could prove itself to everyone, yeah?
Some say this would, somehow, 'cheapen' the experience or that by proving itself to everyone, less people would (again, somehow?) not follow god. That is also an excuse.

What mentally sound person would see irrefutable proof that God is real and that everything God 'said' is real, and still say 'meh... I don't believe it'? Not many I'd suspect! And even if 'many' did do this, wouldn't it be a lot less than those who don't have faith in it and perish?

So for centuries of looking, no proof has been found. Why is that?

Some would say it's 'because there is no god'. And surely that may be true.
But could it also be true that God, creator of all things, is simply forcing people to 'have faith' to find him?
What benefit does that serve such a loving being, to see the inevitable eternal damnation of many of the beings it's said to love?!?

[JoeyKnothead]

This: "a heap of clay gathered on its own and suddenly lived" is this:

Atoms came together and, owing to their properties, some of em bunched up into chemicals. These chemicals, in turn, according to their properties, bunched up, and next thing ya know, humans have created the means of our own eternal destruction.

That's best we can tell. To propose a"creator", in the common religious sense, is unwarranted.

... with less words.

How might we ever get us the first clod of clay, if we don't use us atoms to do it?

I propose it's far more rational, and complies with much supporting evidence, to conclude life arose from the atom clumping to become the chemical clumping, to the life being. And NEVER have I propose a mud dauber was there arubbing her tiny little mud dauber hands together.

And that ain't to pick on the mud daubers there - every single one of em I ever met never tried to convince me their queen was ressurrected.

[brunumb]

I believe all people know deep inside them that God is real, some just want to suppress that idea, because they don't like the message.

My turn. I believe all people know deep inside them that God is not real, some just want to suppress that idea, because they don't like the idea that we are not that special and when we die that is the end.

[brunumb]

Certainty is a personal conviction which may or may not be based on fact. A man can be 100% certain his wife didn't cheat on him even if she comes home late, smelling of alcohol with strange men's telephone numbers stuffed in her bra. In short if one has information and one is entirely convinced by it , one can be said one know with 100% certainty there is a God.

Just as when a panel of male religious elders decides that your daughter is lying and has not been sexually abused, you can be 100% certain that they are correct.

[Diagoras]

So for centuries of looking, no proof has been found. Why is that?

What do you mean by "proof"? Do you mean like a mathematical proof? A conclusion that is 100% certain?

Yes, that would satisfy 'proof' for the vast majority of humans <..>

Because God is not math?

Why place such a high burden that God needs to be proven with 100% certainty when practically nothing else is held to such a standard?

Well, mathematical proofs are surely held to that 100% standard...

In any systematic system of investigation (such as science), the importance of the thing being proved generally has a direct bearing on the standard of proof required. Lives would be at risk if we contented ourselves with only a 95% confidence in the equations of gravity, for example. I suggest that God is 'important enough' to warrant a high standard of proof.

However, I don't believe that a god could be proved to exist by mathematics alone - it's the wrong 'tool for the job'. I also am inclined toward the claim that logic alone can't prove a god exists (e.g. Hume: "Whatever we conceive as existent, we can also conceive as non-existent.")

I read the OP more along the lines of:

"Whenever we've searched for the true reason behind a particular phenomenon, we've found some aspect of natural law to adequately explain it. We've never found God as the only explanation."

Recognising that my changing the OP question slightly might be constructing a straw man (or shifting the goalposts?), I'd answer that the cumulative successes of scientific explanations over the centuries effectively leaves less and less 'room' for any theory of God - and evidence for it - to be found that is still congruent with (i.e. 'in agreement or harmony with-') proven scientific fact.

I agree with Dawkins spectrum of belief where he says "the existence of God is a scientific hypothesis like any other." There are gradations of belief and people can fall anywhere in the spectrum of belief.

There's some debate here about whether either a '1' or a '7' is strictly possible. Given the symmetry of the spectrum though, it seems reasonable to demand the same standard of evidence from anyone claiming to be a '1.1' as from a '6.9'. It's my opinion that evidence for the former is what's being claimed as 'not found'.

[nobspeople]

[Replying to otseng in post #55]

Why place such a high burden that God needs to be proven with 100% certainty when practically nothing else is held to such a standard?

God is the high standard, is it not? So why excuse god's inability for not making sure it's able to be proven to those who as it?

In history, how can anything be proven to be true? Same with sociology, economics, politics, law, etc.

The excuses for god are quite tiring. Listen: god (if it's what people say it is; all knowing, powerful, et al) can provide proof of it being real, to those asking, in ways that would convince them
Yet it doesn't
So either it can't
Doesn't want to
Or isn't real

Even science cannot prove anything.

Nor does it claim to, as I'm sure you know. But this isn't about 'science', this is about god coughing out and not proving itself to those who seek it.

[nobspeople]

[Replying to 1213 in post #2]

I think it is because the point is not to believe in the existence of God, but to be righteous, to have right understanding of good and right and the desire to do what is good and right.

This seems to be saying you can't be good and righteous if you know that god exist which is ludicrous in every sense of the word.

I don't think it's silly at all. If you knew God existed, of course you'd do his bidding. But if on some level we all think it's a bunch of prehistoric nonsense, then only those who find real righteousness in the words will follow them.

I suppose it, like everything 'bible', it comes down to how one defines 'righteousness'. If one thinks it's only something you can get from god, sure. But I find it silly (and almost belittling) to suggest that one can only be righteous if they are 'of god'. But some people love to belittle people and thus, raise up their deity.

[otseng]

God is the high standard, is it not? So why excuse god's inability for not making sure it's able to be proven to those who as it?

It sounds as if it's more your standard than God's. God's standard is actually to have faith.

(Heb 10:38) Now the just shall live by faith: but if [any man] draw back, my soul shall have no pleasure in him.

The excuses for god are quite tiring. Listen: god (if it's what people say it is; all knowing, powerful, et al) can provide proof of it being real, to those asking, in ways that would convince them

The evidence and arguments are quite convincing enough for me. And apparently enough for many others as well.

Even Jesus while he was on earth never made it clear he was God, or even the Messiah for that matter. Though he did do things to confirm he was from God, he left a wide margin for having faith.

As for God being omnipotent, I would not agree with that. There are many things that God cannot do and will not do.

[nobspeople]

[Replying to otseng in post #87]

It sounds as if it's more your standard than God's.

The standard of many, not just mine. I'd think that, if this super loving god is loving, he'd want to ensure everyone has the ability to know, not just have faith.
Yet, seems faith is all that it's offering, which isn't very loving at all to me and many. But of course, to believers, this 'faith' is super loving, which is nothing more than an excuse IMO.
It never ceases to amaze me (and others) of the amount of excuses believers make for their lackluster magician in order to justify their chosen lifestyle agenda.
It shouldn't, knowing the basics of how people work. If god's only good for one thing, it's definitively surprising us with its inability to do much of anything.

The evidence and arguments are quite convincing enough for me.

That's great. For you. But there are those that god knows that need more than talking in riddles, 'his word' with its inconsistencies, the lack of proof and the need to rely on 'faith'. God know this and does nothing.

Though he did do things to confirm he was from God,

Today and even back then, there were those who didn't believe.
The rebuttal is something like: "well, if they were shown and didn't believe why should god show us now?" Which is utterly stupid comparison to make, assuming god loves humanity. God should never stop showing himself to those who seek it.
But that hasn't and isn't happening to everyone.
The rebuttal for that is something like: "You don't know that!"
But I can tell you, after searching for a long, long time, he hasn't shown proof to me one iota.
Maybe he just doesn't care about me?

[1213]

...I would imagine they would go down considerably. Don't you? If they go down considerably, would this not be 'for the better'?

I don't believe they would go down from current situation.

...I no longer believe because I prayed for God's contact, for decades, and no such luck....

Why did you do so?

[POI]

...I would imagine they would go down considerably. Don't you? If they go down considerably, would this not be 'for the better'?

I don't believe they would go down from current situation.

You do not think if everyone KNEW they were being watches and judged of their actions --- (murder, rape, theft), they would do it all the same? Really? Anyone who has ever committed murder, rape, and theft, always knows they are being watched, and are going to be held accountable?

...I no longer believe because I prayed for God's contact, for decades, and no such luck....

Why did you do so?

Because I was indoctrinated in the religion. I thought God existed, so I prayed to Him. After about 30+ years of feeling I was talking to myself, I started to question the faith; and began more extensive investigation(s).

1. So, is God playing hide and seek with me, or...
2. Am I too stupid to know He is actually contacting me, or...
3. Am I too plagued with evil to know He is/was calling on me?

If God answers your prayers, please pray for God to contact me, or, have God tell you something about me, so you can share that knowledge here with me? This will prove He speaks to you. Otherwise, I'm not so sure God speaks to you at all; if you claim He ever has?