Proof of the Existance of God

[Autodidact]

one other thing,lets say that u r right and there is nothing outside ...then wat would u lose if u died as a believer
but...if there was realy something out there ...wat would u win as a non-believer

Oh that's so brilliant, so original, because I've never heard Pascal's Wager before in my life, or seen it refuted.

 

[tumbleweed41]

Mmmmm...e. coli....

 

[ImmortalFlame]

I realy tried to imagine that there is nothing there to be honest with you...but it always failed...i did my best to disbelief but all was failure

and if u meant that u couldnt see god by your bare eyes...then u r denieng microbes existence,or any other creatures or stars which your eyes cant see..

to see god u need more than your bare eyes...and its not easy..for not everybody is allowed to such glory,it takes alot of work untill u enter the circle...

Again, you've not said anything remotely airtight or original with regards to the existence of a God. I can tell you, flat-out, that I am looking at the universe through 20-20 vision and see no God or intelligence in it.

one other thing,lets say that u r right and there is nothing outside ...then wat would u lose if u died as a believer
but...if there was realy something out there ...wat would u win as a non-believer

And what if you and I are both wrong, and you're punished for having the wrong beliefs?

It's not a question of "what if".

i think the answer is simple...except if there is something which i couldnt understand from your message

And what was that?

 

[Aye-aye]

one other thing,lets say that u r right and there is nothing outside ...then wat would u lose if u died as a believer
but...if there was realy something out there ...wat would u win as a non-believer

For the first, I would loose living an honest life. For the second, I would have my integrity.

 

[newhope101]

Maybe if there is a God he knew that science would get so advanced that the lay population would have to depend on the hypothesis of scientists for many 'truths'. That in itself appears to be some sort of 'faith'. Even the laws of physics were tweaked to give rise to quantum physiscs. The atom was a new world.

At Mathew 24:10 speaks to a falling away of the faith and 11 speaks about many false prophets leading many astray. Perhaps God knew this was all going to happen.

Believers in God are not supposed to be able to proove anything that is why we need faith. If there was someone running around now bringing people back to life, curing disease instantly etc saying that he was the son of God still some would not believe as was the case in Jesus' time.

The beauty of it is that those that do not hope in an after life will likely get exactly what they expected. If there is no afterlife then hopefully we follow a religion that is loving and giving and has made better people of us than we would have been without a belief in God. In the last days "Gods' people' are supposed to shine like the stars. The way religion is now that aint happening.

It is much easier to accept a primate infant survived a chromosone fussion, which appears to have had no advantage at the time, have that mutation proliferate, and go onto produce mankind.

It is much easier to believe in luck that design, I guess.

 

[tumbleweed41]

Maybe if there is a God he knew that science would get so advanced that the lay population would have to depend on the hypothesis of scientists for many 'truths'.

No, it would be silly to depend on a hypothesis for truth. Only a foolish man would do so.
It is much more reasonable to rely on scientific theories find the truth. You know, an explanation of a set of related observations or events based upon proven hypotheses and verified multiple times by detached groups of researchers.

It is much easier to accept a primate infant survived a chromosone fussion, which appears to have had no advantage at the time, have that mutation proliferate, and go onto produce mankind.

It is much easier to believe in luck that design, I guess.

On the contrary, it is much more reasonable to believe in empirical evidence than in ancient mythologies.

 

[RedOne77]

Maybe if there is a God he knew that science would get so advanced that the lay population would have to depend on the hypothesis of scientists for many 'truths'. That in itself appears to be some sort of 'faith'. Even the laws of physics were tweaked to give rise to quantum physiscs. The atom was a new world.

There is always going to be some sort of 'faith' with everything. We cannot be experts in everything, and few of us are experts in anything! This goes for all subjects and issues, not just science. What we can do, however, is educate ourselves so we can determine who the experts are in what fields, and have a basic understanding of how the world works so our world view is based on the best analysis we can have of this world.

Still, with the internet, free public schools, and free libraries, if someone wanted to learn about something, with a little hard work they could understand the basics of nearly any subject.

At Mathew 24:10 speaks to a falling away of the faith and 11 speaks about many false prophets leading many astray. Perhaps God knew this was all going to happen.

Believers in God are not supposed to be able to proove anything that is why we need faith. If there was someone running around now bringing people back to life, curing disease instantly etc saying that he was the son of God still some would not believe as was the case in Jesus' time.

I tend to agree with this. True, there is no proof of God and true faith and belief cannot stem from tangible proof. Without drastic proof some people simply will just not believe, and it is their right to reject God - however sad such a decision is.

The beauty of it is that those that do not hope in an after life will likely get exactly what they expected.

How do you figure? Yes, the Bible talks about death as a sleep, especially in the OT with the sheol, but it is quite clear that there will be an afterlife; a judgment with the separation of the righteous and unrighteous. I somehow doubt that a judgment is not what is expected to those who believe in no afterlife.

If there is no afterlife then hopefully we follow a religion that is loving and giving and has made better people of us than we would have been without a belief in God. In the last days "Gods' people' are supposed to shine like the stars. The way religion is now that aint happening.

I think the Bible sums it up well with James 1:27 "Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world." It is those that will care for their neighbors that will be God's people and shine like the stars I think, regardless of their 'religion'.

It is much easier to accept a primate infant survived a chromosone fussion, which appears to have had no advantage at the time, have that mutation proliferate, and go onto produce mankind.

It is much easier to believe in luck that design, I guess.

How do you know that such a mutation had no advantage? Besides, even neutral mutations can get fixated in a population (albeit usually not as fast) and contribute to the overall progression of evolution.

Scientists are pretty sure that chromosome 2 is a fusion of two chromosomes as there is an inactive telomere (a specific sequence of DNA (TTAGGG.....) usually present at the ends of chromosomes) in the middle of our chr. 2, and there are two centromeres (usually only one on each chromosome), one on each arm (one on one side of the inactive telomere, and one on the other side) with one of them being inactive and the other not. So why would these things exist if it was not the fussion of two chromosomes?

 

[painted wolf]

God is a sneaky jerk who wanted to trick us into believing falcehoods. It' the only logical answer.

wa:do

 

[AxisMundi]

Are you aware of the theory called Intelligent Design? That doesn't quite prove that God exists, but it does give interesting evidence.

Another thing that is interesting, is how so called scientists totally dismiss it as "bad science", because it is not proven. Those sames scientists will swear by the fantasy land stuff the top physicists are saying, which is not only not proven but has no basis whatsoever.

It is a purely emotional argument. They don't want to believe in God, they don't want God to be a topic of scientific debate. So much do they hate the idea, that they'll not consider any evidence, no matter how solid it is.

On the other side of the coin, preachers give no evidence either. Even those claiming to have proof of the existence of God, offer nothing but emotional evidence. This banana is to perfect to be created by accident, and other bull crap like that.

God does exist, and there is solid proof. When the 3 wisemen came to see Jesus, they knew he'd be there. The people of Jesus' time believed in him, because they knew the predictions of his coming, yet today, almost nobody knows of these predictions.

The first page of the Bible tells of Jesus, and gives us the time of his birth (4 days of the Lord or 4,000 years after 4004 BC which is the date printed on the first page). The people who did the references in the center of many KJV Bibles knew of the predictions of Jesus long before his birth, yet none of that is offered as proof now days. I can only assume that preachers and people don't know it now days.

Jesus tells us about nuclear war, saying stars (hydrogen fusion fireballs) will fall from the sky and the sky will be rolled away like a script and the sun will be darkened and the moon will not give her light (nuclear winter), and the people will hide under rocks and in caves (or in fallout shelters).

Do you think something as important as nuclear war would not be in the Bible? Do you think God would simply forgot to mention that? Or that God didn't know about nuclear weapons 2000 years ago? God knows.

That is more proof of the existence of God.

Now, you can continue to follow your leaders, who don't seem to know these things, and make excuses for things. That is your choice.

For those of you who'd like to join me, I'm going to be creating a new church. A church who's purpose is to learn God's plan, and follow it, and save mankind.

The churches teach us to love God, as a man loves a rich friend who can give you the rewards. Only, it is reward in heaven, not reward with cash. That form of love is the same though, it really is not love is it. When a rich man looses his money, all his friends abandon him, proving they never did love him.

God is not stupid. God knows what is in your hearts, much better than you do. You must love God without thinking of your own personal reward. Thinking of reward in heaven does nothing but cloud the love.

My church will offer no reward in Heaven, nor fear of Hell. The only reward we can offer is peace and tranquility and purpose and real joy in life. Love. That is all I can offer. Isn't love enough?

Tony

Firstly, ID was crafted by a group of YECers in retaliation for their bible getting kicked out of public schools, where it doesn't belong, in an attempt to get around SCOTUS rulings by ductaping science onto relgion. It is indeed "bad science" as it doesn't follow the Scientific Methed. Just search for "Ken MIller Intelligent Design" and/or "Intelligent Design Debunked" on Youtube and you'll get plenty of evidence showing why ID is simple BS.

Secondly, your bible is hardly self supporting evidence, especially when a religion is crafted around a pre-existing "prophesy".

Thirdly, Nuclear War? You'rte kidding, right? Ancient man litterally thought that meteriorites were "falling stars". Many people today, even though we know what they are, still refer to them as "shooting stars". BTW, the moon isn't a light source, something ancient man also did not know. She doesn't "give her light" as the moon reflects sunlight. Except for the occasional Greek mathemetician or philosopher, common thoughts of the day saw the world as a flat disk, including the writters of your bible.

Sorry, but "your" church offers what every other church offers. Nothing different, nothing new.

 

[AxisMundi]

Maybe if there is a God he knew that science would get so advanced that the lay population would have to depend on the hypothesis of scientists for many 'truths'. That in itself appears to be some sort of 'faith'. Even the laws of physics were tweaked to give rise to quantum physiscs. The atom was a new world.

At Mathew 24:10 speaks to a falling away of the faith and 11 speaks about many false prophets leading many astray. Perhaps God knew this was all going to happen.

Believers in God are not supposed to be able to proove anything that is why we need faith. If there was someone running around now bringing people back to life, curing disease instantly etc saying that he was the son of God still some would not believe as was the case in Jesus' time.

The beauty of it is that those that do not hope in an after life will likely get exactly what they expected. If there is no afterlife then hopefully we follow a religion that is loving and giving and has made better people of us than we would have been without a belief in God. In the last days "Gods' people' are supposed to shine like the stars. The way religion is now that aint happening.

It is much easier to accept a primate infant survived a chromosone fussion, which appears to have had no advantage at the time, have that mutation proliferate, and go onto produce mankind.

It is much easier to believe in luck that design, I guess.

Firstly, the bible is a theopolitical manifesto, nothing more. It is full of scare tactics meant to keep the powerbase, adherents, in check and under the thumb of those who benefit the most from a huge powerbase, clergy.

Secondly, we share a common ancestor with apes, they are not our ancestors.

Thirdly, Evolution is the slow process of adaptation as a species enters a new environmental niche in the never ending quest for food sources and/or protection from predators. It doesn't involve series of sudden mutations that just happen to be beneficial.

 

[newhope101]

Quote "How do you figure? Yes, the Bible talks about death as a sleep, especially in the OT with the sheol, but it is quite clear that there will be an afterlife; a judgment with the separation of the righteous and unrighteous. I somehow doubt that a judgment is not what is expected to those who believe in no afterlife." by RedOne77.

RedOne77, I think the only time the bible appears to speak to final death after this life is at the time of the great tribulation & Armaggedon. All those that have died before will get their resurrection. Those alive at the time of Armageddon will get to see the truth, whatever that is, and have opportunity to repent. I believe the signs will no longer be a matter of faith and still people will choose to not follow. I think these will go to Sheol the final death. In that way people that still refuse to believe after the truth has been made so obvious to all, will 'get what they expect'.

I think shining like the stars will be even more obvious than good deeds. It will be unmistakable to anyone..as obvious to see as the stars in the sky. Those people could be a standing faith or a completely new people made of many former faiths whom will all 'see' the same thing. The big advantage in doing good deeds and having love for neighbour is it firstly this pleases God and it will be easier to make any necessary changes when the time comes. Also those in expectation will not be as terrified as those that are not, when and if Armageddon begins.

As for the chromosome comment I made earlier, I'm pretty sure I read there was no advantage in the chromososme number change in itself. I agree there's alot more to it than just that. The point I think I was trying to make is humanity if very lucky. The gene thing, the earth being just where it is, the atmosphere just the way it is, having Jupiter to protect earth from impact long enough for life to evolve. So much has fallen earths way that it could be seen as being exceptionately fortunate if one does not believe in design.

I see all the requirements needed for a viable environment on earth and for mankind to have thrived as at least an indication that some higher being may have had a hand in it all.

 

[David M]

Secondly, we share a common ancestor with apes, they are not our ancestors.

To be accurate we share a common ancestor with all the extant ape species. We are apes, our common ancestor was also an ape and the species that existed between that ancestor and all of todays ape species were also apes.

 

[AxisMundi]

To be accurate we share a common ancestor with all the extant ape species. We are apes, our common ancestor was also an ape and the species that existed between that ancestor and all of todays ape species were also apes.

Hardly accurate, I'm afraid.

We are indeed primates, but primate doesn't automatically indicate an ape.

The last common ancestor fossil found between apes, humans and chimps was the Nakalipithecus. That species is not considered an "ape", but a primate.

 

[RedOne77]

We are apes, a sub-set of primates. Usually anything in the super-family hominoidea is considered an ape. Nakalipithecus is in the family hominidae, a subset of hominoidea, making it an ape as well, in particular a great ape.

 

[Gunfingers]

Homo Sapiens Sapiens is a member of the family Hominidae, also known as the Great Ape Family. Other members of this family include the Gorrilla, the Orangutang, and the Chimpanzee.

Hominidae - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[RedOne77]

RedOne77, I think the only time the bible appears to speak to final death after this life is at the time of the great tribulation & Armaggedon. All those that have died before will get their resurrection. Those alive at the time of Armageddon will get to see the truth, whatever that is, and have opportunity to repent. I believe the signs will no longer be a matter of faith and still people will choose to not follow. I think these will go to Sheol the final death. In that way people that still refuse to believe after the truth has been made so obvious to all, will 'get what they expect'.

2 Corinthians 5:10 "For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, that each one may receive what is due him for the things done while in the body, whether good or bad." No one will be exempt from judegment; God is no respecter of persons (Acts 10:34, Romans 2:10).

I think shining like the stars will be even more obvious than good deeds. It will be unmistakable to anyone..as obvious to see as the stars in the sky. Those people could be a standing faith or a completely new people made of many former faiths whom will all 'see' the same thing. The big advantage in doing good deeds and having love for neighbour is it firstly this pleases God and it will be easier to make any necessary changes when the time comes. Also those in expectation will not be as terrified as those that are not, when and if Armageddon begins.

I agree good deeds probably isn't all that these shining stars will be known for, but only time will tell exactly what this all means.

As for the chromosome comment I made earlier, I'm pretty sure I read there was no advantage in the chromososme number change in itself.

I'll grant that no advantage is present, but even neutral mutations can spread throughout a population - just not as fast. Some studies have shown that it may have taken up to 2 million years for humans to completely split off from the chimp line.

I agree there's alot more to it than just that. The point I think I was trying to make is humanity if very lucky. The gene thing, the earth being just where it is, the atmosphere just the way it is, having Jupiter to protect earth from impact long enough for life to evolve. So much has fallen earths way that it could be seen as being exceptionately fortunate if one does not believe in design.

The thing is, is that there is (as of now, and perhaps for ever) no way to test just how lucky we are. But even if everything was just so, it would take much hubris to declare without thought that it must be design. We don't know all the factors, let alone their importance, required to create intelligent life. We don't even know all the possibilities for life; we are used to life on Earth, but maybe life can exist in a myriad of other ways. Plus it is possible for the conditions themselves to be met in a variety of ways.

For example, DNA is nice, but it isn't the only naturally occurring informational molecule, and it isn't required for life. Being in the habitable zone is nice, yet the habitable zone is not that small, plus there are other ways to get light and heat - some of the Jovian moons are heated up from the gravity of their planet and receive light from the Sun as well as their planet. The atmosphere is constantly changing, in no small part due to the life on this planet. Jupiter is nice to deter asteroids and comets out of our way, but you could get the same effect from multiple less massive objects. Not to mention without Jupiter it is possible that there would be a planet instead of an asteroid belt, greatly reducing our chances of being hit by one as there would be a lot fewer of them floating around.

I see all the requirements needed for a viable environment on earth and for mankind to have thrived as at least an indication that some higher being may have had a hand in it all.

It is nice to think that way, but it is also possible we just won the cosmic lottery. I have nothing against such thinking. I am, however, cautious to use such thinking to show that there is a God out there looking out for us. I just don't see it as a good apologetic tactic to convert people or keep them from leaving the faith.

 

[painted wolf]

The only living apes not in the Great Ape group are the Gibbons. Primates are a highly inclusive order... containing prosimians (Lemurs, Lorises, Tarsiers and Galugos) and the Simians (Old and New World Monkeys, Lessor and Great Apes and Humans).

Humans are Primates, Simians and Great Apes as were our ancestors... That is the joy of the nested hierarchy.

wa:do

 

[David M]

Hardly accurate, I'm afraid.

We are indeed primates, but primate doesn't automatically indicate an ape.

The last common ancestor fossil found between apes, humans and chimps was the Nakalipithecus. That species is not considered an "ape", but a primate.

Sorry but that is not how nested heirarchies work. The common ancestor of the living members of our taxonomic family will be in the same taxonomic family.

Note that I was specific in saying that the common ancestor we share with the extant apes was an ape. But it would be just as true to say that the common ancestor we share with all extant primates was also a primate.

Nakalipithecus is in the family Hominidae which makes it a Great Ape in common parlance, its an ape. Its Order is Primate, just as ours is. The first Hominidae speciated from the Hylobatidae (the family to which Gibbons belong) about 18 million years ago.

 

[Super Saiya Jinn]

As for the chromosome comment I made earlier, I'm pretty sure I read there was no advantage in the chromososme number change in itself. I agree there's alot more to it than just that. The point I think I was trying to make is humanity if very lucky. The gene thing, the earth being just where it is, the atmosphere just the way it is, having Jupiter to protect earth from impact long enough for life to evolve. So much has fallen earths way that it could be seen as being exceptionately fortunate if one does not believe in design.

I see all the requirements needed for a viable environment on earth and for mankind to have thrived as at least an indication that some higher being may have had a hand in it all.

How about all the rest of the barren planets in our galaxy letalone the rest of the Cosmos?
You are only claiming we are "exceptionately fortunate" because you are here to make that statement, yes the chance is small that life could get to this point through Evolution without distruption. However as with the dinosaurs, we know there has been distruption on life on Earth in the past with a meteorite.
Anyway, the chance maybe small but the Cosmos is so big that most Cosmologists including the late great Carl Sagan, will agree that there is a very good chance that there are plenty of other Civilisations out there that have been "exceptionately fortunate" too.

Check out Drake's equation on E.T. life.
Drake equation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[RedOne77]

SSJ,

I love your avatar, I liked your post, but the Drake equation is full of s***. We honestly don't even know all the variables that should be there, let alone their value. Some variables are more concrete than others, but in the end there is too much unknowns in the equation for it to be scientifically useful at the present.