~Title~ Is God Real or “Just some word”
For my topic, I want to discover if God is really just a word we use to describe the indescribable, or if he is a true hope for mankind. I will be researching to find any evidence to prove God is real while helping my own faith grow in the process. I want to prove that God is not just some word we use to explain the infinite amount of things we cannot explain, but is eternal and is our hope for one day living everlasting life with him and avoiding hell.
~Research Questions~
- Does doubt prove that God is real?
- Is science the ultimate source of truth?
- If God exists, then how does that prove evolution is not the main source of life on Earth?
~Hypothesis~
- Whether God exists or not, we use him as a handy metaphor for all the mysteries in the universe that we cannot explain any other way.
~Sources~
1.Martin, R. K. (n.d.). Having faith in our faith in god: Toward a critical realist … https://www.researchgate.net/publication/248989791_Having_Faith_in_Our_Faith_in_God_Toward_a_Critical_Realist_Epistemology_for_Christian_Education
–Background: In this article, critical realism is used as an epistemological layout of how Christians make sense of their faith, in a world where culture is the main reason the nature of reality is concealed and faith of religion is discredited.
–How I plan to use it: I plan to use this source as a starting stone for diving deeper into trying to discover if God is real or if he’s just some word we use to describe things. Robert K Martin did an amazing job in covering the challenges many believers face within their own faith.
2. King, Dr. D. (2021, November 23). Is science the ultimate source of truth?. King Ministries | Evangelist Daniel King | Our Goal? Every Soul! https://kingministries.com/proof-god-is-real/is-science-the-ultimate-source-of-truth/
–Background: This article explores the question “Is science the ultimate source of truth.” Dr. King, explains how science can be used to answer any question you may have about the “truth” and how it may not always be science but someone or something more powerful that that. He tries to prove that God is the ultimate source of truth with the help of science.
–How I plan to use it: I will use the article to try to explain how yes we believe that science is the main reason why were alive today and yes that may be partially true, but there is someone who created science which in turn created us as human beings.
3. Herrmann E. On the Distinction between the Concept of God and Conceptions of God. International journal for philosophy of religion. 2008;64(2):63-73. doi:10.1007/s11153-008-9163-z
–Background: This article debates the concept of God and conceptions of God. Eberhard Hermann argues against metaphysical realism about if it is more reasonable to claim a concept or to look for more fitting conceptions and assesses those claims.
–How I plan to use it: I will use this article to explore more within the thought that concepts and conceptions are two totally different things and how that may impact the way we see and believe God.
4. Craig WLane, Sinnott-Armstrong W. God? A Debate between a Christian and an Atheist. Oxford University Press; 2004.
–Background: This article is a debate between a Christian who believes God is the truth to everything, and an atheist who doesn’t believe in God at all.
–How I plan to use it: I plan to use this to be able to explain the other side, the thoughts of maybe God is not real. I will use the atheists point of view and the Christians point of view to aid in discovering the big mystery of God.
5. The Bible
–Background: The Bible is the scripture of the Christian religion. It tells the history of Earth from the earliest creation. Throughout the book, there are different books with different authors, all narrating what they have seen and encountered. This follows Jesus’ life and tells about everything he has done and everything he plans to do.
–How I plan to use it: I couldn’t think of a better source to use. I will use the Bible the uncover any “scientific” truths that ultimately lead back to God. This will help me determine the only logical reason of life on Earth.
Counterintuitive Fall 2024 
Is there anything that I can change about this? I know it was late so it wasnt done while we were going over it in class therefore it might have some stuff wrong with it. Are my sources ok, or should I try to find different ones?
Sunflower, I don’t want you to spend more time on the Proposal if it keeps you from putting together your first short argument.
But, when you have posted a Definition Argument, maybe (at this point you could start with your Causal if you prefer), you could revise your Background descriptions so that general readers will understand them better. I know the word Epistemological, but I still don’t see what an “epistemological layout of how to make sense of faith” might mean, OR what “culture is the main reason the nature of reality is concealed” is trying to express. I have my ideas, but I’m not confident in them.
1.–Background: In this article, critical realism is used as an epistemological layout of how Christians make sense of their faith, in a world where culture is the main reason the nature of reality is concealed and faith of religion is discredited.
–How I plan to use it: I plan to use this source as a starting stone for diving deeper into trying to discover if God is real or if he’s just some word we use to describe things. Robert K Martin did an amazing job in covering the challenges many believers face within their own faith.
I certainly understand “challenges believers face.” AND I can see that EXPLAINING whether God exists or not is a matter of epistemology. It’s not enough to tell non-believers that “we have to have faith.” For lay people, evidence is essential.
For a Rebuttal argument (later), of course, you can challenge and credible “God skeptic” to answer whether they believe in particle physics. And, if they take the bait, ask them what evidence they have for quarks. Everybody takes SOMETHING on faith, right?
2. –Background: This article explores the question “Is science the ultimate source of truth?” Dr. King, explains how science can be used to answer any question you may have about the “truth” and how it may not always be science but someone or something more powerful that that. He tries to prove that God is the ultimate source of truth with the help of science.
–How I plan to use it: I will use the article to try to explain how yes we believe that science is the main reason why were alive today and yes that may be partially true, but there is someone who created science which in turn created us as human beings.
It’s a worthwhile point to claim that nothing exists by accident. I’m not sure that’s the point of this source, but it COULD BE. Right? There’s still the question of whether God is active in daily physical phenomena or whether he “merely” created all the STUFF in the universe and the rules that govern how they behave, and then, tipped the first domino to let loose a cascade of consequences that are still playing out today without any further interference. Is that part of what this is about?
3. –Background: This article debates the concept of God and conceptions of God. Eberhard Hermann argues against metaphysical realism about if it is more reasonable to claim a concept or to look for more fitting conceptions and assesses those claims.
–How I plan to use it: I will use this article to explore more within the thought that concepts and conceptions are two totally different things and how that may impact the way we see and believe God.
I’m going to be friendly but blunt about this one, Sunflower. I doubt you have any idea what you mean by the difference between Concepts and Conceptions, but I’d be delighted for you to prove me wrong. I also suspect the author doesn’t have a clue either. 🙂
4. –Background: This article is a debate between a Christian who believes God is the truth to everything, and an atheist who doesn’t believe in God at all.
–How I plan to use it: I plan to use this to be able to explain the other side, the thoughts of maybe God is not real. I will use the atheists point of view and the Christians point of view to aid in discovering the big mystery of God.
I love this source, Sunflower. The summary alone is fascinating and very promising.
Here’s the link I followed: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/15665399.2004.10819836
If you own the book, that’s great, but maybe you won’t have to buy it.
Here’s what intrigues me from the summary:
Many people who know no better mindlessly repeat that you cannot prove that God exists and you cannot prove that he doesn’t. God? A Debate between a Christian and an Atheist is a welcome blow against this current dogma, not because it succeeds in proving the issue one way or the other, but because it is a text which both aims to be popular and yet also reveals so clearly how THE ISSUE IS A MATTER OF REASONED ARGUMENT. Neither protagonist appeals at any point to intuition, or gut feeling, or a leap of faith. Both appeal at every stage in their debate to what our best reasoning can extract from our best-confirmed overall picture of the universe. This picture is one whose main outlines are settled by modern science but which also extends beyond what science reveals. Thus, both authors accept that current cosmological theories are relevant to their debate, but so too are reflections on the nature of our moral consciousness, or on the best explanations for certain historical events.
THAT IS WORTH READING.
5. –Background: The Bible is the scripture of the Christian religion. It tells the history of Earth from the earliest creation. Throughout the book, there are different books with different authors, all narrating what they have seen and encountered. This follows Jesus’ life and tells about everything he has done and everything he plans to do.
–How I plan to use it: I couldn’t think of a better source to use. I will use the Bible the uncover any “scientific” truths that ultimately lead back to God. This will help me determine the only logical reason of life on Earth.
I’m dubious that the Bible will be of much use in that regard, but I’m eager to see you take a stab at it, Sunflower.
THIS IS YOUR ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY-IN-PROGRESS.
By the time you’ve collected all the sources you need for your research (beyond these five, I would think), you’ll HAVE a Bibliography to add to your Portfolio. It will BE the Bibliography. We’ll just change its name.
NONJUDGMENTAL SIDE NOTE
Yesterday I heard a TV preacher (I don’t know if he would describe himself that way) explain that BEFORE The Flood, individual human lives spanned hundreds of years (Methuselah – 969 Years. Jared – 962 Years. Noah – 950 Years. Adam – 930 Years. Seth – 912 Years, and so on). He further claimed that animals on the Ark were consumed (meat eaten) as long as enough remained to keep the species secure. The new taste for meat, he explained, has persisted until today and explains why we don’t live very long now.
I say that not because I think he was insane, but because it does illustrate how far from reason we can get if we try to reconcile observed data with historical reports we can no longer verify.
Anything helpful there?
Provisionally graded. Revisions are pretty much required for this post-in-progress, and Regrades will happen every time I become aware of an update, including AFTER it goes into your Portfolio.