Does god EXIST?

[One Love]

(click image for larger, more easily readable version)

What point are you trying to make?

 

[beorhthelm]

What point are you trying to make?

that Christains arent too smart?

 

[Acker79]

What point are you trying to make?

Any excuse to post that really. But I suppose it's either:

"when you understand why you deny all those other gods, you'll understand why I deny yours"

or

Christians and atheists aren't all that different.

 

[pea]

So the bible says the earth is 5000 years old but science tells us it is very much older, we are still supposed to believe the bible is the correct and only alternative to the existence of the universe and the origin of life?

except that's completely untrue.

--

Beorhthelm, I'm not sure what your point is. You don't tackle a question only relating whether something exists by defining it, first you establish if it exists and then you define it. The very concept of defining a creator God is most likely a fruitless exercise, as our powers of conception and perception are only those which that God would have given us. The mistake a lot of religions seem to make is that they try and compartmentalise their God and try to characterise that God as loving, liberal, conservative, inclusive, exclusive etc etc. The reality is that if there is one creator God then all those ideas and concepts were God's invention and that God probably see's good and value in everything. Just as God created people who see the good in tradition and discipline and order he created people who see good in freedom and equality and liberty. All of this is irrelevant to the question 'does God exist?'

--

There is evidence throughout the world of God’s hands and purpose, the Bible even says so itself in Romans 1.

A Creator God, if He exists, must, by definition, exist beyond the limits of the universe in order to have created it. The laws of physics tell us that we cannot make measurements beyond the limits of this universe. Therefore, scientists can conclusively determine that we cannot ever detect God using any of our instruments.

Scientists have always recognised the plausibility of God, many see the idea of God as a crucial part of how they do their work and see the world. The idea that science and religion are somehow in opposition to one another is laughable.

The world is rationally and beautiful structured, ordered and intricate its a natural feeling to think that there is a mind behind it. I simply find Christianity the most intellectually and emotionally satisfying explanation. I do not claim is that my religious belief, or anyone's, can meet a scientific test. My experience of God has been regular, consistent, irrefutable and matches with the same experiences of so many others I've met or spoken to.

There's an astrophysicist called Hugh Ross who puts it into better words than I ever could:

"My observation that the Bible's multiple creation narratives accurately describe hundreds of details discovered much later, and that it consistently places them in the scientifically correct sequence, convinced me all the more that the Bible must be the supernaturally inspired word of God. Discoveries in astronomy first alerted me to the existence of God, and to this day the Bible's power to anticipate scientific discoveries and predict sociopolitical events ranks as a major reason for my belief in the God of the Bible. Despite my secular upbringing, I cannot ignore the compelling evidence emerging from research into the origin of the universe, the anthropic principle, the origin of life and the origin of humanity. The accumulating evidence continues to point compellingly towards the God of the Bible"

Sorry for the long post but lots of people have made comments that I wanted to address

Bit of a heavy subject to make my NSC bow

 

[readingstockport]

A physcicist by the name of Stephen Hawking says that he does not believe in god, mine trumps yours as he is FAR more famous and has far more scientific publications, rather than creationist ones that is, to his name.

Compare

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugh_Ross_%28creationist%29

and contrast

Stephen Hawking - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

There is a good reason that something like 95% of the scientific establishment (I can find a cite for the figure somwhere I think, I recall having heard it but it may be SLIGHTLY less than that) do not hold to a creationist god. It is because the evidence does not point to it.

And as for One Love's 'spiritual experience'. So what. A non-tangible experience you can not describe, that no one else experienced and that you can provide no proof for other than your unsupported word.

Meaningless, other than to yourself.

 

[Silk]

except that's completely untrue.

--

Beorhthelm, I'm not sure what your point is. You don't tackle a question only relating whether something exists by defining it, first you establish if it exists and then you define it. The very concept of defining a creator God is most likely a fruitless exercise, as our powers of conception and perception are only those which that God would have given us. The mistake a lot of religions seem to make is that they try and compartmentalise their God and try to characterise that God as loving, liberal, conservative, inclusive, exclusive etc etc. The reality is that if there is one creator God then all those ideas and concepts were God's invention and that God probably see's good and value in everything. Just as God created people who see the good in tradition and discipline and order he created people who see good in freedom and equality and liberty. All of this is irrelevant to the question 'does God exist?'

--

There is evidence throughout the world of God’s hands and purpose, the Bible even says so itself in Romans 1.

A Creator God, if He exists, must, by definition, exist beyond the limits of the universe in order to have created it. The laws of physics tell us that we cannot make measurements beyond the limits of this universe. Therefore, scientists can conclusively determine that we cannot ever detect God using any of our instruments.

Scientists have always recognised the plausibility of God, many see the idea of God as a crucial part of how they do their work and see the world. The idea that science and religion are somehow in opposition to one another is laughable.

The world is rationally and beautiful structured, ordered and intricate its a natural feeling to think that there is a mind behind it. I simply find Christianity the most intellectually and emotionally satisfying explanation. I do not claim is that my religious belief, or anyone's, can meet a scientific test. My experience of God has been regular, consistent, irrefutable and matches with the same experiences of so many others I've met or spoken to.

There's an astrophysicist called Hugh Ross who puts it into better words than I ever could:

"My observation that the Bible's multiple creation narratives accurately describe hundreds of details discovered much later, and that it consistently places them in the scientifically correct sequence, convinced me all the more that the Bible must be the supernaturally inspired word of God. Discoveries in astronomy first alerted me to the existence of God, and to this day the Bible's power to anticipate scientific discoveries and predict sociopolitical events ranks as a major reason for my belief in the God of the Bible. Despite my secular upbringing, I cannot ignore the compelling evidence emerging from research into the origin of the universe, the anthropic principle, the origin of life and the origin of humanity. The accumulating evidence continues to point compellingly towards the God of the Bible"

Sorry for the long post but lots of people have made comments that I wanted to address

Bit of a heavy subject to make my NSC bow

Could you explain the rational and beautiful structure at work in the Japanese earthquake and tsunami?

 

[pea]

Your figure is completely wrong, studies have shown that between 39% and 52%* of scientists don't believe a God. One pattern across these is that a very small percentage actually consider themselves atheists despite not believing in a God.

Lets not play scientist top trumps, would hate to pull out my faraday, mendel, kelvin, planck, newton, pascal, descartes, bacon, copernicus, galileo and einstein quotes

*the question for this one was actually 'do affiliate yourself with a religious group' so a bit different

 

[One Love]

And as for One Love's 'spiritual experience'. So what. A non-tangible experience you can not describe, that no one else experienced and that you can provide no proof for other than your unsupported word.

Meaningless, other than to yourself.

I agree completely.

I'm not trying to prove anything to anyone which I have told you many times before.

Please stop feeling challenged by my experiences.

 

[One Love]

Could you explain the rational and beautiful structure at work in the Japanese earthquake and tsunami?

It wasn't an apocalyptic event. We know the human race is trying so hard to destroy everything.

 

[Gary Gurr]

The BIBLE seems to think that this one god DOES, but humans have existed for THOUSANDS of years BEFORE that book came about. And they worshipped all KINDS of gods before then.

GOD.

NO!

 

[readingstockport]

Your figure is completely wrong, studies have shown that between 39% and 52%* of scientists don't believe a God. One pattern across these is that a very small percentage actually consider themselves atheists despite not believing in a God.

Lets not play scientist top trumps, would hate to pull out my faraday, mendel, kelvin, planck, newton, pascal, descartes, bacon, copernicus, galileo and einstein quotes

*the question for this one was actually 'do affiliate yourself with a religious group' so a bit different

I do not believe your figure. Do you have a citation for it please?

And pull out your quote mines all you want. einstein was an atheist no matter how much the gullible try to quote mine his comments to 'show' he was not. Give me a quote of his, I will give you the quote in context which shows you have quote mined it.

Edit to add. I know I did not cite my figure. I also did not claim that 95% of scientists identifeid as atheists. I said that 95% did not believe in a creationist deity.

Edit again to add.

faraday 22 September 1791 – 25 August 1867
Mendel July 20, 1822 – January 6, 1884
Kelvin 1824–1907
Newton 25 December 1642 – 20 March 1727
pascal 19 June 1623 – 19 August 1662
Descartes 31 March 1596 – 11 February 1650
Copernicus 19 February 1473 – 24 May 1543
Galilei 15 February 1564 – 8 January 1642


origin of species 24 November 1859

So, other than Planck not one of the scientists you are going to quote was born after the publication of the Origin of Species. 4 died before the Origin was published in fact. And lets not play Pascal, that is a no starter. Lets call it pascals wager and leave it at that shall we?

 

[readingstockport]

I agree completely.

I'm not trying to prove anything to anyone which I have told you many times before.

Please stop feeling challenged by my experiences.

I'm actually not challenged tbh. I can already see you are a highly intelligent person and I suspect I would rather enjoy meeting you for a pint and a chat - no joke. I just find it somewhat strange that you believe in an intangible entity based on no more than a feeling you once had.

If I told you I was sure that choclate was the cure for AIDS, so long as you ate it at 1:21 on Sunday moring whilst wearing a hijab, based purely on a feeling I once had you would quite rightly reject my claim, on a similar basis I feel I have to reject yours until you provide more tangible evidence.

 

[One Love]

I'm actually not challenged tbh. I can already see you are a highly intelligent person and I suspect I would rather enjoy meeting you for a pint and a chat - no joke. I just find it somewhat strange that you believe in an intangible entity based on no more than a feeling you once had.

Actually on a feeling that is more and more constant (apart from the times I am busy and get distracted) and gets stronger day by day. I personally find that adequate grounds for belief.

 

[readingstockport]

Ok, I do understand that.

But I do not, and never will (as I suspect you have guessed tbh), accept that, in anyway, as any kind of evidence that a god of any kind exists.

I'm out of this one again, off to listen to lympics. Enjoy your weekend OL.

 

[glasfryn]

NO!

is probably the right answer








notice there how I am keeping my options open

 

[glasfryn]

NO!

is probably the right answer








notice there how I am keeping my options open

 

[beorhthelm]

Beorhthelm, I'm not sure what your point is.

my point is two fold, mostly around ill-founded assumptions. firstly, you claimed you must have "an alternative explanation" to be able to reject the existance of a god. thats illogical, you wouldnt expect an alternative explaination to be disbelieving of Unicorns. it is only because you assign a great deal of definitions and attributes to your god, that it explains something. you've defined that you god is an explaination for the world, just as someone could do so for Unicorns. secondly you use "God" as a pronoun, that indicates a particular thing. as Ackar79 so well illustrates, there is a very wide pantheon of gods, and the atheist is only rejecting one more than those of a monotheistic tradition. so when the question "does god exist" it is very pertinent to clarify which god you are talking about. Yahweh? Ganesh? Thor? the answer will be different.

theres also a whole thing with "believe", that athiests "believe" there is no god. no they dont. but i dont think religious people are capable of understanding this, so i'll leave it.

 

[Glenn-Murray]

93% of the National Academy of Sciences in the US are Atheist, despite being in a hugely Christian country.

It's VERY clear that the more intelligent and educated someone is, the less likely they are to be religious.

 

[Silk]

It wasn't an apocalyptic event. We know the human race is trying so hard to destroy everything.

Eh? If the world is rationally and beautifully ordered, what is the beauty and rationality behind the Japanese earthquake and tsunami?

Blah blah blah is not a good answer.

 

[Fungus]

Who created "God"?