A Proof that God Exists

[PureX]

Read Paul's epistles and understand what they say.

Romans 1:20 KJV - Psalm 19:1-3 KJV -

Why? Paul is no more a Christian than you or I. He has his opinions, and we have ours. But his opinions were written to Christians of 2,000 years ago. They were meant for them, right or wrong. Not us.

We really need to stop worshipping these archaic texts and start seeking and expressing Christ in our own time and place.

 

[PureX]

You simply can't posit the universe has been designed. To assume design you must likewise assume a reason/purpose for said design...which of course infers a god who's existence was predicated upon the very notion of a designed universe.

Circular logic. :idunno:

I agree that intent is inferred by the 'design' that we see being expressed as the order within existence. But that is the atheist's problem, isn't it? Not mine. The design, and the inference of intent it generates are there for all to see and contemplate. Any conclusion they may lead us to, is up to us.

 

[quip]

I agree that intent is inferred by the 'design' that we see being expressed as the order within existence. But that is the atheist's problem, isn't it? Not mine.

It's the theist's problem when they assert design as EVIDENCE for both god and his intentions.

The design, and the inference of intent it generates are there for all to see and contemplate.

There's no design to see, yet plenty to contemplate. That's the illusory nature of the beast.

 

[PureX]

It's the theist's problem when they assert design as EVIDENCE for both god and his intentions.

There's no design to see, yet plenty to contemplate. That's the illusory nature of the beast.

It's not illusory. The order is there, or existence could not maintain itself. And the fact that it does maintain itself, implies that doing so is the intent of the order.

We don't know the origin of this order and it's apparent intent, but it is evident for all to witness and contemplate. Saying that it's not is not a reasonable argument.

 

[patrick jane]

Why? Paul is no more a Christian than you or I. He has his opinions, and we have ours. But his opinions were written to Christians of 2,000 years ago. They were meant for them, right or wrong. Not us.

We really need to stop worshipping these archaic texts and start seeking and expressing Christ in our own time and place.

You are the one stuck in the archaic - The Bible's words are timeless and Paul is writing to me and you, read it like it's him talking to you alone.

 

[quip]

It's not illusory. The order is there, or existence could not maintain itself. And the fact that it does maintain itself, implies that doing so is the intent of the order.

We don't know the origin of this order and it's apparent intent, but it is evident for all to witness and contemplate. Saying that it's not is not a reasonable argument.

Order does not necessarily equate to design.

 

[CherubRam]

For a true Christian, God's truth is timeless, and the words of the ungodly are circular. The Dark Matter is primordial, and from it God created this Universe.

 

[turbosixx]

Existence does require order to maintain it's own integrity. And that order IS EVIDENCE of what we would generally call "design". But so far, that's all we can say about it, because we have no idea from whence that "design" originates. Yet it is evident in all things. Always. From before the universe began, to after it ends (presumably). And I have encountered no reasonable internal, materialistic explanation for this mystery. None.

It's not proof, but it is evidence. And it's impossible to reason our way around it. Not honestly, anyway.

Well put. I think that is what Paul was referring to, as PJ pointed out, when he said:
Rom. 1:20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse.

Another strong piece of evidence in my mind is the bible itself. Written over a period of 1500 years by some 40 authors with widely varying backgrounds and cultures and yet it works. My wife and I have been married 20+ years and we can experience the same thing and we don’t agree as well as the bible does. There’s no way man put that together without divine intervention.

 

[glassjester]

It's the theist's problem when they assert design as EVIDENCE for both god and his intentions.

What kind of evidence would you accept as proof of God's existence?

 

[PureX]

You are the one stuck in the archaic - The Bible's words are timeless and Paul is writing to me and you, read it like it's him talking to you alone.

No, he wasn't writing to me or you. Any more than Jesus was speaking to me or you when he was speaking to the ancient Jews of his day. You just assume this because you are idolizing the text.

 

[PureX]

Order does not necessarily equate to design.

In this case, the order is the genesis of the outcome, as it is with any designed thing.

The way energy does and does not behave is dictating the ongoing nature of all that exists. That 'order' within the energy is the designing element. We do not know it's origin, but the element of design is evident for anyone to see. In fact, it's that elemental design that the scientific process is dedicated to discovering.

 

[Hedshaker]

I'm inclined to agree.


What properties must the cause of the universe have?

Don't know, nor does anyone. Personally I don't believe the Big Bang event was an absolute beginning and a lot of top line cosmologists and scientists are now coming around to that view, including Roger Penrose. But it's highly theoretical at this time.

 

[quip]

What kind of evidence would you accept as proof of God's existence?

The unnecessary kind.

God's existence could be as apparent and effortless as your breathing or the pumping of your heart. Doesn't it seem odd that one must be reared to the existence of their particular creator?

 

[OCTOBER23]

BEN MASADA said,
From Abraham and until Aristotle God existed only for the pious who could exercise faith.
----------------------------
Hebrews 11:1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

ABRAHAM MET THE LORD GOD AND TALKED WITH HIM ABOUT HIS FURTHER ACTIONS.

Genesis 18:27 And Abraham answered and said, Behold now, I have taken upon me to speak unto the Lord, which am but dust and ashes:

Genesis 17:9 And God said unto Abraham, Thou shalt keep my covenant therefore,
thou, and thy seed after thee in their generations.

Genesis 18:13 And the LORD said unto Abraham,

Wherefore did Sarah laugh, saying, Shall I of a surety bear a child, which am old?


BEN MASADA , Without GOD, Abraham , Isaac and Jacob, YOU would not exist.
==================================================.

 

[quip]

In this case, the order is the genesis of the outcome, as it is with any designed thing.

The way energy does and does not behave is dictating the ongoing nature of all that exists. That 'order' within the energy is the designing element. We do not know it's origin, but the element of design is evident for anyone to see. In fact, it's that elemental design that the scientific process is dedicated to discovering.

Let's examine this intuition which drives this "evident design"?

Take anything designed by man (say, a flat-screen TV) and place it in the middle of an open prairie. Why does this scene produce a odd image in your mind?
Because you've just juxtaposed an object of obvious designed origin against the backdrop of non-designed environs. The intuition of contrast and discordance is patently obvious.

The problem arises when you assert that this open prairie is likewise designed......based on the intuition demonstrated above? That's absurd, the intuition falls prey to its own inception...its illusory. What you stated above amounts to no more than: "nuhhh uhhh....god's design exists :AMR1: "

 

[OCTOBER23]

QUIP,

Do you follow Christopher Hitchens theology ?

 

[Clete]

A PROOF THAT GOD EXISTS.

According to Moses Maimonides, a Philosopher, Theologian and Medical Doctor in his book "The Guide for the Perplexed," there would be no need for a Creator if the universe was eternal, without beginning or end. In other words, God would not exist. However, if the universe did have a beginning,God by necessity would exist.

From Abraham and until Aristotle God existed only for the pious who could exercise faith. For Cosmologists God had only been a probability, extremely small nevertheless a probability. At the time of Aristotle that small probability had been erased as Aristotle discovered that the universe was eternal; no beginning and no end. The pious went on with their faith but as Science was concerned, the non-existence of God had been proved. The line of thought that God's existence was depending on the universe having had a beginning lasted from about 330 BCE with Aristotle and until 1922 ACE with Georges Lemaitre a Catholic priest who brought the news about the Big Bang to the whole world as the beginning of the universe.

Cosmologists throughout the world had to adopt Lemaitre's discovery as the nearest approach to the truth they had ever achieved. Now, since the universe had indeed a beginning, a proof had be established for the existence of God, blessed be He!

I am as strongly convinced of the existence of God as a man can be short of actually seeing Him face to face but this post is the biggest heap of steaming stupidity that I have ever seen presented as any sort of proof of the existence of God or of anything else for that matter.

Every atheist on this forum that reads your post will bust out laughing out loud! All you'll have done is convince them that theists are all stupid. And make no mistake, they will lump us all in the stupidity heap with you. If anything you'll have succeeded in further cementing them into their unbelief. Way to go!

 

[quip]

QUIP,

Do you follow Christopher Hitchens theology ?

No.

 

[Clete]

There is no 'proof' that God exists, of course. But I do believe that there is reasonable evidence to suggest that a God exists. Some will dismiss that evidence, and some will accept it, but I do believe it's more reasonable to accept it as it is reasonable evidence, even if we can't yet accept it as conclusive evidence.

I, personally, don't choose to believe in the reality of God based on objective or empirical evidence, alone, anyway. I choose to believe it based on the results of such belief, and on the fact that I have no proof or conclusive evidence to the contrary. And I find the results of such a belief to be positive, overall. And so until someone can show me that such a belief is wrong, I will continue to hold to it.

Contradictions cannot exist PureX, not in physical reality. The universe (i.e. reality) will fight you if you attempt to live your life based on a lie because reality doesn't care whether you agree that it is real or not.

The point being that your positive results, assuming of course that they are objectively positive, is further evidence, if not proof, that the presuppositions upon which you've built your worldview are true.

This is true even of atheists who reject the existence of God but still base their lives on the truths that are implied by His existence. Again, contradictions cannot actually exist. The fact the the atheist's beliefs are in tacit contradiction to the precepts upon which they live their lives, doesn't change the validity of the precepts. To whatever degree a man's life is working, it is based on the principles of rationality (i.e. reality) and to the extent a man's precepts are irrational, his life will be self-defeating, self-immolating and self-destructive.

In short, it is the fact that man's mind is capable of rational thought that proves God's existence. The atheist BELIEVES that the human mind came about through mindless, random chaos but a thing cannot be greater than its cause. A mind cannot come from its opposite.

Resting in Him,
Clete

 

[glassjester]

The unnecessary kind.

God's existence could be as apparent and effortless as your breathing or the pumping of your heart.

The unnecessary kind of evidence? Not sure what you mean.

What would convince you? For example, if God Himself came to you and told you He was God - I get the feeling you'd still deny Him. Call it a hallucination.

You say there's no convincing evidence. But what evidence could convince you?

Some specific sight? Sound? Scientific discovery? Rational argument?