Topic: Proof that God exists - page 15. (Read 62385 times)

just because there is no proof doesn't mean u shouldn't believe it

Perhaps I misunderstood what you were expressing, however...

First, big bang as the theory exists, is lacking the idea of intelligence and emotion. Intelligence and emotion are part of the universe. Therefore big bang, if it existed, must have had intelligence and emotion. Thus, big bang theory is inaccurate, and big bang probably didn't exist at all. For sure it didn't exist according to what big bang theory suggests it is.

I agree with the idea that people logic fails them with regard to things outside everything, which is what "universe" means. We say the words, "outside the universe," but we don't understand the concept of what we say.

Cause and effect as a unit have no meaning before time or the universe. But cause does have meaning. The universe is the result or effect of the Great First Cause, which, because of the nature of the universe, also fits our definitions of "God," but at least the result of God. The first cause may not have actually been God. The first cause may have been something that God created.

True. The universe did not exsit before time.


Why talk the if's of the big bang? Nobody has proven that it existed. And lots of people have good evidence that it did not exist. Google "electric universe" to find sites where you can see the info that collapses big bang theory.

God existed outside the universe prior to Him setting time and the universe in place. Now, He still exists outside of time and the universe, even though He has a presence inside the universe as well.

Why talk "God?" Because science has proven that God exists, even though science hasn't proven big bang exists, or even could have existed.



This is true. Even if science had not proven God to exist, the very nature of the complexity of the universe strongly suggests that He exists. People operate by what they perceive, or at least by what they think they perceive.

Why are you talking like I am the owner of some god? As I said in a previous post somewhere, that I know of, I am not an owner of any god. Then you go on to call this god that I supposedly own with a "they" like it would be plural or something. You are inconsistent in two little sentences. Such makes things difficult to understand what you mean.

Then you call this god you created for me an atheist? What funny farm are you a resident of (don't answer that - not really interested - just rhetorical).

I'm not really interested in hearing about why you think I own a god, or why you would question me about my god even if I owned one. What does that have to do with the fact that God exists, or the proof (in this case, scientific proof) that God exists?

Okay, so if you're so unsure of why your god does the things that it does, why would you even worship them? Are you SURE that they will allow you into a "heaven" if it does exist at all?

Again, to reiterate, your god is an atheist. Unless you're wrong about your god being eternal.

Not an assumption. A faith thing. But that's just me, in answer to your questions, that have nothing to do with proving God.

However, mankind makes so few cause and effect "chains" where he can determine exactly what the outcome will be...

and the few chains that he does make are so essentially tiny compared with all the cause and effect processes that God has made in the universe...

that it can easily be seen that God is so extremely more complex than mankind, including in intellect...

that when mankind asks about a God-cause...

the answer is so far beyond man and the way he thinks and understands, that...

a microbe would have as much grasp of the answer as a man would.

Wait, so in that case you assume that god has no creator, right? So... what purpose did he have of creating the universe in that case? What reason would there be to do so? Why bother punishing atheists when you yourself are an atheist?

God is eternal, having no beginning or end. Ants in an ant farm terrarium might ask what created people. God is infinitely farther beyond us than we are beyond ants.

As far as how science has proved the existence of God, simply look through my posts in this thread and some of the related threads. Or go to my profile info and look at my posts there.

See? I'm not laughing. I respect that you are a fuzzy, warm person... maybe even fluffier.

Exactly as highlighted. Here you are on the right track.  I saw you visited that thread: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/--1318880 Just keep questioning.

There is no such thing as heliocentrism (solar system and the spinning ball earth with gravity as magic).
With heliocentrism destroyed there is no big bang.
With big bang gone there is no evolution.
And with evolution gone there is no need for atheism and aliens.(Only idiot says in his heart that there is no God)  

LOGOS fully support stationary flat plane earth with sun&moon revolving around, which is of course the most logical.
It is nonsense to believe in God's Word and in the same time supporting heliocentrism.
As you assumed correct, you are living on a flat plane earth under a firmament-dome environment. You just need to know your Maker, that is your grand purpose, your mission. I wish you well on that journey.

Water is produced in an internal combustion engine during the ignition phase, and of course, instantly turns to steam due to the heat. But the percentage is small compared to other gases produced such as nitrogen.
The steam is actually unwanted because inside a cold exhaust pipe the steam condenses back into water and corrodes the steel. Which is why cars that do more short journeys, wear out their exhaust pipes quicker.

To call an internal combustion engine "a steam engine" is foolish, just another one of your childish word definition twisting games. Small amount of carbon monoxide are produced as well, shall we call them carbon monoxide engines?

Embarrassingly for yourself steam engines are actually external combustion engines. But I'm sure you'll find a way to lie your way around that.

 

And how has science proved that god created the universe? Can you explain what existed pre-god, in that case? Feel free to prevent my "ignorance" from affecting your beliefs.

What is my deity? I checked my pockets, under the bed, in the closet, etc., and I found that I can't find any deity that I own.


Now YOU are completely mistaken. All gasoline and diesel engines, even gas turbines, are steam engines at the same time that they are gasoline or diesel engines. You are completely missing it. You better go back to school.



Thank you for the exhortation.

Since science has proved that the God Who created the universe exists. I don't have to attempt to prove such at all.

Continue to show your ignorance if you like.

So - you haven't proven the existence of your deity, combining whatever you want or not.

And I do know about internal combustion engines, and they have nothing to do with steam.

Please stop embarrassing yourself.

I agree with you. In fact, I'll go one step further.

Presently, I am not in the mode of proving the existence of God. I have other things to do. That's part of the reason I do the simple thing. I point people to the three scientific laws that prove God exists when combined. These laws are (as I have stated many times) cause and effect (as upheld by Newton's 3rd Law), complex universe, and universal entropy.

Do you need to dismantle your car engine just so that you know enough about your car to drive it? Of course not. You can still drive your car around even if you think the engine is a steam engine (which it is, btw). But if you want to get into a discussion about your car engine, and if you want to be truthful about it, you need to examine things about car engines a bit.

I have examined car engines. I know that your gasoline car engine is really a steam engine, even though people don't generally call it that. It is an internal combustion engine. But more to the point, it is an internal combustion gasoline steam engine.

Same with the scientific proof for the existence of God. Like the internal combustion gasoline steam engine, the fact that people don't generally say the laws that prove the existence of God, in a fashion that shows that they prove God exists, doesn't negate the fact that these laws show that God exists.

In other words, an internal combustion gasoline engine is a steam engine, even though people don't say it this way very often. Also, the laws of cause and effect, complex universe, and universal entropy, when combined, prove that God exists, even though people don't say it this way very often.

Have I proven that God exists? Absolutely not. And I have stated such many times. But you keep on coming back with the idea that I haven't proven God exists. Great! We are in agreement on this point. Why do you keep bringing it up?

If you want to see the proof that God exists, stop looking at the things that I say, and go look at the laws and their combination. Of course, if you don't want to see the proof that God exists, don't look at the laws. You can drive your car if the only things you know about the engine are that it takes gas, and you gotta turn the key to get it started.

But if you start to talk about how your car engine works when you haven't even examined the proof for how it works, you are missing it mentally in some way.

Dude, you've said a lot of things over the time. But you definitely have not proved God to exist. THAT is a fact.

The problem is that when you look science law in the face, and see that you don't like it, you go about ignoring it and trying to make it not exist, somehow. How silly of you. Why not simply accept the truth? It's there whether you accept it or not. Accepting it will simply make life more fun, and protect from eternal death if you go to God in truth and sincerity.

That's what I like about you jokers. First, you set out to prove something. Then you do the math. Then you set up computers and a laser. Then you say that the whole thing proves that randomness exists. All the while you conveniently forget that all your proving was a whole bunch of cause and effect actions and reactions that used a whole bunch of other cause and effect actions and reactions to prove what? To prove that cause and effect can be bypassed? Don't make me laugh.

Quantum physics proved the existence of randomness whatever you're saying:

https://www.quora.com/Philosophy/How-do-we-know-that-randomness-actually-exists

There is a rather easy experiment that can be done with a laser that proves randomness exists. That it's part of the universe.

Sorry Badecker.

The fact that he's annoying and boring isn't really a problem. The problem is that he's wrong. That's the real problem.