• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

What Would It Take to Prove the Existence of a God?

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Originally posted by: lobadobadingdong
Originally posted by: JustAnAverageGuy
Originally posted by: lobadobadingdong
just keep in mind not a singe thing has ever been disproven in the bible. (archealogically/scientifically speaking of course, most evidence actually supports the bibles historical accounts)
Click to expand...

There are many things that have been disproven.

I'm not saying EVERYTHING in it is wrong, but most certainly EVERYTHING in it isn't correct.
Click to expand...

name 1 single thing, that has been disproven beyond any doubt.
Click to expand...

Well, I'm actually open minded for once in my life. The last few months have been seriously eye-opening. I'd love to see some non-bias, unflawed evidence or proof that something in the Bible has been disproven beyond contestation.
 
Whether or not there is a god has no consequence! Something, or somebody created the universe, and with it, laws. I live by the rules.

Let's put it this way, anyone who thinks that god needs them to pray to him is a dip. Anybody who thinks that god is telling them to do something is a dip.

Prayer is a form of focus, it allows you to focus on something you would like to achieve. You should never pray for the goal or object. You should pray for the ability to work hard to achieve something.

People believe in God because they need faith, and they won't find that faith in them selves. It's perfectly fine, but take everything that anyone says is "God's decree" with a grain of salt. Never act through blind faith, and always be true.
 
Originally posted by: FFMCobalt
Originally posted by: Joemonkey
Originally posted by: FFMCobalt
I'm still waiting for what parts of the Bible have been proven wrong...
Click to expand...

just for the record, and i hate to say it, you and i agree on many many things... for example, how PTC is the best bittorrent client and how bananaphone was the best thing EVER. However, as much as i hate to say it, PROVEN is a loaded word. i can prove to a lot of terrorists that america is a great country in many ways, but they still would blow stuff up. "the proof is in the pudding"
Click to expand...

Exactly. And you can "prove" that the Bible says a lot of things that it really doesn't say by taking scripture out of context. However... until someone can come up with something that directly shows the Bible to be wrong, I'm all ears. Just because evidence that it is true has not been found yet does not constitute it is automatically wrong. I'm sure the theory of the earth being round and not flat was just a widely-accepted theory until it's shape was actually observed from space. Etc.
Click to expand...

There's not an educated person alive who believes Genesis to be a literal account of creation, so the only thing left is to dilate the time scale upon which it is based; a day in Genesis might mean a billion years owing to time dilation, etc. It seems the more we learn the more scripture is horribly obfuscated to support the observed facts of our world. I personally believe that human language is a perfect community of human ideas; however, not at all a proper medium for the spiritual of transcendetal. To think that my creator needs to communicate to me through such an ambiguous way seems profoundly absurd; it's further worsened by Papal intermediaries who further obfuscate meaning.

For what it's worth, you're asking to prove a positive, and this obviously cannot be done. If people are willing to change the interpretation of scriptures to accommodate scientific discoveries, then there's really no more that can be said. Creationists did this by trying to promulgate "creation science", and they will continue to do so. I personally like to keep my science and my moral character separate; I don't need science derived from observed natural phenomena to somehow rationalize my behaviors of provide some higher meaning for them.

Also, for what it's worth, no educated person since Aristotle EVER thought the earth was flat, and that includes Columbus.
 
Originally posted by: MikePanic
show him to me
Click to expand...

Define "show". Many Christians will tell you that God has "shown" Himself to them in different ways. Or that you can see the face of God in certain works like working in a hospital or homeless shelter or in situations like the way the nation came together to help Hurricane Andrew victims so many years ago or in pictures of the way the country united after 9/11...

If you believe in that kind of stuff, you may be able to "see" God -however, if you're meaning to look upon the face of God with your physical eyes... well, that's another story.
 
Originally posted by: Cashmoney995
Whether or not there is a god has no consequence! Something, or somebody created the universe, and with it, laws. I live by the rules.

Let's put it this way, anyone who thinks that god needs them to pray to him is a dip. Anybody who thinks that god is telling them to do something is a dip.

Prayer is a form of focus, it allows you to focus on something you would like to achieve. You should never pray for the goal or object. You should pray for the ability to work hard to achieve something.

People believe in God because they need faith, and they won't find that faith in them selves. It's perfectly fine, but take everything that anyone says is "God's decree" with a grain of salt. Never act through blind faith, and always be true.
Click to expand...

Very few tidbits of truth (and common sense) in what otherwise is a post that I strongly disagree with. 😛
 
Originally posted by: Descartes
Originally posted by: FFMCobalt
Originally posted by: Joemonkey
Originally posted by: FFMCobalt
I'm still waiting for what parts of the Bible have been proven wrong...
Click to expand...

just for the record, and i hate to say it, you and i agree on many many things... for example, how PTC is the best bittorrent client and how bananaphone was the best thing EVER. However, as much as i hate to say it, PROVEN is a loaded word. i can prove to a lot of terrorists that america is a great country in many ways, but they still would blow stuff up. "the proof is in the pudding"
Click to expand...

Exactly. And you can "prove" that the Bible says a lot of things that it really doesn't say by taking scripture out of context. However... until someone can come up with something that directly shows the Bible to be wrong, I'm all ears. Just because evidence that it is true has not been found yet does not constitute it is automatically wrong. I'm sure the theory of the earth being round and not flat was just a widely-accepted theory until it's shape was actually observed from space. Etc.
Click to expand...

There's not an educated person alive who believes Genesis to be a literal account of creation, so the only thing left is to dilate the time scale upon which it is based; a day in Genesis might mean a billion years owing to time dilation, etc. It seems the more we learn the more scripture is horribly obfuscated to support the observed facts of our world. I personally believe that human language is a perfect community of human ideas; however, not at all a proper medium for the spiritual of transcendetal. To think that my creator needs to communicate to me through such an ambiguous way seems profoundly absurd; it's further worsened by Papal intermediaries who further obfuscate meaning.

For what it's worth, you're asking to prove a positive, and this obviously cannot be done. If people are willing to change the interpretation of scriptures to accommodate scientific discoveries, then there's really no more that can be said. Creationists did this by trying to promulgate "creation science", and they will continue to do so. I personally like to keep my science and my moral character separate; I don't need science derived from observed natural phenomena to somehow rationalize my behaviors of provide some higher meaning for them.

Also, for what it's worth, no educated person since Aristotle EVER thought the earth was flat, and that includes Columbus.
Click to expand...

All-inclusive statements like "no educated person alive" can ever be proven true, either. You can't possibly know the beliefs of every person in history.
 
Originally posted by: FFMCobalt
Originally posted by: Descartes
Originally posted by: FFMCobalt
Originally posted by: Joemonkey
Originally posted by: FFMCobalt
I'm still waiting for what parts of the Bible have been proven wrong...
Click to expand...

just for the record, and i hate to say it, you and i agree on many many things... for example, how PTC is the best bittorrent client and how bananaphone was the best thing EVER. However, as much as i hate to say it, PROVEN is a loaded word. i can prove to a lot of terrorists that america is a great country in many ways, but they still would blow stuff up. "the proof is in the pudding"
Click to expand...

Exactly. And you can "prove" that the Bible says a lot of things that it really doesn't say by taking scripture out of context. However... until someone can come up with something that directly shows the Bible to be wrong, I'm all ears. Just because evidence that it is true has not been found yet does not constitute it is automatically wrong. I'm sure the theory of the earth being round and not flat was just a widely-accepted theory until it's shape was actually observed from space. Etc.
Click to expand...

There's not an educated person alive who believes Genesis to be a literal account of creation, so the only thing left is to dilate the time scale upon which it is based; a day in Genesis might mean a billion years owing to time dilation, etc. It seems the more we learn the more scripture is horribly obfuscated to support the observed facts of our world. I personally believe that human language is a perfect community of human ideas; however, not at all a proper medium for the spiritual of transcendetal. To think that my creator needs to communicate to me through such an ambiguous way seems profoundly absurd; it's further worsened by Papal intermediaries who further obfuscate meaning.

For what it's worth, you're asking to prove a positive, and this obviously cannot be done. If people are willing to change the interpretation of scriptures to accommodate scientific discoveries, then there's really no more that can be said. Creationists did this by trying to promulgate "creation science", and they will continue to do so. I personally like to keep my science and my moral character separate; I don't need science derived from observed natural phenomena to somehow rationalize my behaviors of provide some higher meaning for them.

Also, for what it's worth, no educated person since Aristotle EVER thought the earth was flat, and that includes Columbus.
Click to expand...

All-inclusive statements like "no educated person alive" can ever be proven true, either. You can't possibly know the beliefs of every person in history.
Click to expand...

Oh come on, you have to allow me a little hyperbole; however, anyone believing the earth to be flat would suffer undoubtedly from ignorance, so I believe my statement to be pretty accurate. No educated person would believe the earth flat any more than geocentrism after Galileo and Kepler, because the dogma of geocentrism was displaced by education. The following quote by Andre Gide that I like so much applies here:

"Man's responsibility increases as that of the gods decreases."
 
This sentence is somewhat ironic in itself.

"One should always avoid using always, never, every, none, all, and any other all inclusive or all exclusives words. "
 
Originally posted by: Descartes
Originally posted by: FFMCobalt
Originally posted by: Descartes
Originally posted by: FFMCobalt
Originally posted by: Joemonkey
Originally posted by: FFMCobalt
I'm still waiting for what parts of the Bible have been proven wrong...
Click to expand...

just for the record, and i hate to say it, you and i agree on many many things... for example, how PTC is the best bittorrent client and how bananaphone was the best thing EVER. However, as much as i hate to say it, PROVEN is a loaded word. i can prove to a lot of terrorists that america is a great country in many ways, but they still would blow stuff up. "the proof is in the pudding"
Click to expand...

Exactly. And you can "prove" that the Bible says a lot of things that it really doesn't say by taking scripture out of context. However... until someone can come up with something that directly shows the Bible to be wrong, I'm all ears. Just because evidence that it is true has not been found yet does not constitute it is automatically wrong. I'm sure the theory of the earth being round and not flat was just a widely-accepted theory until it's shape was actually observed from space. Etc.
Click to expand...

There's not an educated person alive who believes Genesis to be a literal account of creation, so the only thing left is to dilate the time scale upon which it is based; a day in Genesis might mean a billion years owing to time dilation, etc. It seems the more we learn the more scripture is horribly obfuscated to support the observed facts of our world. I personally believe that human language is a perfect community of human ideas; however, not at all a proper medium for the spiritual of transcendetal. To think that my creator needs to communicate to me through such an ambiguous way seems profoundly absurd; it's further worsened by Papal intermediaries who further obfuscate meaning.

For what it's worth, you're asking to prove a positive, and this obviously cannot be done. If people are willing to change the interpretation of scriptures to accommodate scientific discoveries, then there's really no more that can be said. Creationists did this by trying to promulgate "creation science", and they will continue to do so. I personally like to keep my science and my moral character separate; I don't need science derived from observed natural phenomena to somehow rationalize my behaviors of provide some higher meaning for them.

Also, for what it's worth, no educated person since Aristotle EVER thought the earth was flat, and that includes Columbus.
Click to expand...

All-inclusive statements like "no educated person alive" can ever be proven true, either. You can't possibly know the beliefs of every person in history.
Click to expand...

Oh come on, you have to allow me a little hyperbole; however, anyone believing the earth to be flat would suffer undoubtedly from ignorance, so I believe my statement to be pretty accurate. No educated person would believe the earth flat any more than geocentrism after Galileo and Kepler, because the dogma of geocentrism was displaced by education. The following quote by Andre Gide that I like so much applies here:

"Man's responsibility increases as that of the gods decreases."
Click to expand...

Again, you're making statements that you cannot possibly reinforce.
 
Proof of a gods existence to me would require a god to come down and talk to me. Not necessarily just for proof. But I would like to ask it things, to understand what it thinks of the world, morality, life, purpose, future, and whether war will ever cease. I'd also like to ask it if there is another planet better than earth, another species more intelligent than humans, and whether there are any inventions over the life of humans that has truely impressed it.

Any proof of a god would be selfish, obviously. But, that is why I don't worry about it too much. I don't need proof of a god to live my life out and thus do not go seeking it.
 
A giant purple monkey will have to descend from the skies, declaring itself god. You cannot disprove the teachings of the purple monkey. The writing passed down from the purple monkey says that we all lived on Mars at one point and that man once procreated with kangaroos.
 
Originally posted by: FFMCobalt
Originally posted by: mithrandir2001
Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
Click to expand...

Numbers 4:1 "The Lord said to Moses and Aaron"

Quoting random verses is retarded. 😛
Click to expand...

But it can be fun too!
Hosea 13:8
I will fall upon them like a bear robbed of her cubs, and will tear open the covering of their heart; there I will devour them like a lion, as a wild animal would mangle them.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by: Match
Originally posted by: FFMCobalt
Originally posted by: mithrandir2001
Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
Click to expand...

Numbers 4:1 "The Lord said to Moses and Aaron"

Quoting random verses is retarded. 😛
Click to expand...

But it can be fun too!
Hosea 13:8
I will fall upon them like a bear robbed of her cubs, and will tear open the covering of their heart; there I will devour them like a lion, as a wild animal would mangle them.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

woohoo! Sounds like fun.
 
define god.

god is a word that is filled with personification. we give god attributes like the ability to act and create ("god created us"), but these attributes are hard to make sense of when we also "define" god to be an omniscient substance outside of time that does not need to create; for, with god, all must exist in its eternal present, like frames of a film that are displayed all at once.

if it so came to happen that god decided to create, does this not imply that god is subject to the linear passage of time: god exists before creation (past), god exists with creation (present), and god exists after creation (future). that is what is implied by giving god the ability to create, but this is contrary to the claim that god is omnipresent.

but if we take away the idea that god is within time, we take away most of what defines ourselves. god does not desire, create, destroy, as these ideas all depend on the notion of time. if we want to give god attributes like creator or miracle worker or healer, we have to redefine what we mean by god.

therefore, when asked what would be necessary for the proof of god's existence, i struggle enough with the definition of god, no less what would be considered a proof. if we define god as something that is everything and timeless, then existence itself, and the mere fact that i know i exist, are enough proof for me to know that "god" exists. i don't think anyone could argue with this fact; but i think many people could argue about my definition of god. god is a sentient being that created the world, they say; but, for me, god as a sentient being is contrary to what is necessary for god to be god.

but then again, i sometimes am amazed that i exist at all. contemplate the idea of nothing. consider a state in which there is no world, no universe, no time. absoute nothing. in this state, nothing would always be nothing. there never was and never will be a something. this idea of nothing can bring me to my knees if i think too much about it. therefore i resolve that there always must be something; that there never could have been nothing. and this idea of there always being something, timeless, correlates with my own definition of god.

sorry for the ramble 🙂
 
If there is no God... how do you explain miracles? Such as a boy that drowns and is pronounced dead comes back to life and begins to breath 2 hours after... (check CNN).
 
Originally posted by: ariafrost
If there is no God... how do you explain miracles? Such as a boy that drowns and is pronounced dead comes back to life and begins to breath 2 hours after... (check CNN).
Click to expand...

My skills in the CNN search engine are apparently lacking. Link?

All I'm finding is Oklahoma City stuff.
 
The search is futile, why even bother? If an afterlife is all you are concerned with, you are a greedy person. If there is a God, and it is just, then there is nothing to worry about. An infinity of suffering or even happiness for that matter is not fair punishment or reward for one's acts during one short human life. The search may be a gratifying experience for some, but I think religions fail to consider the idea that our brief lives we know exist here are reward enough and days on earth should be cherished instead of thought of as a trial.

My answer to the question is that there is no human experience that could prove the existence of a God. If you took today's technology back 500 years you could likely convince most everyone that God exists through the divine miracle known as the walkey talkey.
 
Originally posted by: TheShiz
My answer to the question is that there is no human experience that could prove the existence of a God. If you took today's technology back 500 years you could likely convince most everyone that God exists through the divine miracle known as the walkey talkey.
Click to expand...

Another excellent example that was brought up in the other forum. However they used the example of wood that doesn't burn (i.e. gas fireplace). It closer to a burning bush.

But I think a walkey talkey would be impressive as well.

Attempt to stir up discussion follows:

What would prevent Moses, Noah, Jesus, etc from making an incredible discovery(un-burning wood for example), use it, and say it was an act of God?
 
What would prove the definitive existence of God to me? Easy way would be an obvious change in the laws of physics. Think some of the funnier parts of Bruce Almighty.
 
By definition, you can't prove that God exists.

Let me say that again: Within our definiton of God, it is understood that God is defined to be outside of our universe, and therefore outside the realm of our logic and understanding. This very notion ends up being a brick wall to a number of individuals in today's scientificly-minded society. Two paradoxical ideas butt heads--we want to prove God logically, yet God transcends logic.

That is *basically* what people are trying to say when they reply "you've gotta have faith." You can't explain to another person how to do this, however, because that would enter the realm of logic. Of course, this seems like a cop out akin to "The tooth fairy exists because of unseen magic." There is no way of proving whether you're right, and there will never be, unfortunately. Some people just can't handle the notion that something can't be proven, so they can therefore never accept the possible existence of God.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top