Topic: Scientific proof that God exists? - page 149. (Read 845582 times)

One factual thing in the book does not prove the whole book is true. The bible is real, obviously, however that doesn't mean what's written in it is also true.

''The whole debate is about if science knows better or not than religion. The answer is no. Because evolution is not science.''

Have we made cars, planes, medicine or any technology based on religion? No, every technology is based on science and guess what, IT WORKS. You are typing your retarded shit thanks to science, not religion. Religion did not make computers. Do religious people go to the hospital when they are sick or do they pray and wait for god to heal them? Wake up to reality, religious nut.

The thing is the bible is really two version between old and new testament.

It could be argued that they are speaking about two different gods.

In the first testament they mention elohim that is a plural, and it use lot of references to older myth, and inspired from other myth.

Can be wondered if old testament is really even about the "one god" that much.

But it's inspired from kaballah, and fundemental axioms from tree of life, the concept in both science and relation in the principle of rest/motion, active/passive, emission/reflection, potential/energy, even the concept of archangels, as active principle of creation and all this come from older things like kaballah, egypt, etc.

All the fundamental axioms from science also comes from this actually.

On the wholes thinkers of the so called enlightment century, none of them get to axioms or theory with that level of universality and fundementalism. Or they are just rehash of older things.

And if there one area is really still out of "hard science" it's really biology or evolution. The amount of actual science as in universal axioms and law, metrics or algebra valid all the time in those domains are very slim, if not inexistants.

Most of what actual science do today is burning forest to make energy, doing war for oil, ruining the planet to exploit natural resources, make war to exploit natural resources, when it screw up like Mexico oil spill or fukushima, nobody know how to fix it ..

Or then calling people stupid and ignorant, unable to admit when they cant answer something ..

Yet... He created us in his likeliness. So we potentialy can understand his complexity by the science endevaours in the future.

Thats absolutely wonderful that potentialy the whole world can be within our eyes and the whole complexity within our minds.

Right now it would be hard to imagine us to understand even a tiny part of his magnificence. Ofcourse all of this not to take his place, which would be impossible, but to better worship him, to be one with him.

In my opinion a God that would make evolution could not be the God of the bible. That would pose us two questions.

1) Are there any inspired texts that are better.
2) Is God trying to mischief us? But that would mean its not the God of the bible so there is only first option available in my opinion.

Science.

Entropy shows us there was a beginning.

Complexity shows us that there is something that entropy has not destroyed.

Complexity and entropy combined show us that the complexity of the past was far greater than it is in the present.

Cause and effect (and many other scientific things) show us that the complexity is far beyond understanding.

Whatever caused the "something" of this universe to exist out of nothing, had the complexity of the universe within it, including the complexity of intelligence and spirit and mind.

This all shows us that whatever the Creator is, He/It is God. And it show this to us through science.

There is this earth, if from the science I learned in the boarding school in the book of monotheism, that there is a nature of this proof that the gods exist, ashaduanla thanaillahwaadadna muhaadurrosullah

That does not prove God. Have I said that? That proves validity of BIBLE model of creation of life, that unless any population would produce something else from a cow than a cow, the evolution is impossible. Do you know what a counter argument in logic even is?

And you say Im stupid? Do you know what is an argument? Do you know what is a counter argument?

Evolution is a counter thesis to the Bible. And if one is right the other is wrong. God have described how reproduction works in the same passage as the creation passage. Its deep in meaning. Description is a part of science. The difference between us is that I know what is the difference between a description of facts and its explanation. Yes it is not an explanation in the BIBLE. Evolutionists says that their descriptions are explanations. THEY ARE NOT! You are describing your false theoram with unfactual bullshit. The bible describtion is only one and it remains A FACT! Ofcourse its not explained. DID I SAY ITS SCIENCE or science proof? YOU STARTED THE DEBATE! I told you that talking about evolution does not belong here in this subject BECAUSE ITS NOT SCIENCE. And you like a maniac start to put the words in my mouth that i think creationism is science. IT IS NOT. Neither does evolution. ITS OFFTOPIC THAT YOU HAVE STARTED.

If the population of cows always produces cows,then its the ABSOLUTE TRUTH. The absolute means divine, unchangable. And that remains as fact. Prove that its changable than that would mean its not DIVINE! DO YOU UNDERSTAND? Its the atheist job to prove that God is wrong or unexsistant, otherwise the term atheist is completly moronic.

The whole debate is not about creationism proving God. Its not what its all about. Creationism can not prove God. Ok? Im not claiming it.

The whole debate is about if science knows better or not than religion. The answer is no. Because evolution is not science.

Cows produce cows. They don't produce frogs. That is evolution talk. The point that makes it God-talk is that nothing only produces nothing.

In other words, like begets like. Only something that must be termed "God" has the ability to start a universe, and to make the systems that it takes for cows to make cows, and like to make like. Why? Because before there is a universe, there is nothing. And like only makes like. All a nothing could do alone was make nothing. It takes a REAL God to make the gigantic changes in nothing so that a universe is the result, just like it would take a REAL God to make the gigantic changes in a cow so that it becomes a frog.

No matter what it was that started the system-universe, it is God.

''My proof of validity of God's word is that cow breed cow and thats what been and thats what will'' And you telling me that what I say is desperation? You realize people knew that cows produce cows before writing the bible, right? How does that prove god lmao.

''The one that talks about facts. One kind of animal produce the same kind and will always. Thats a fact. Isn't it? OMG if you have kids what do you expect - a duck? How more factual that could be that you expect human and can have 100% certainty.'' I fail to see how does that prove god. Everyone knew that already before writing the bible, people already knew about animals, trees, mountains. None of that proves god and you obviously don't know what proof even means. I am not going to debate you anymore because it's clear at this point that you are stupid.

I believe that God exists and believes that this world belongs to God
No need to be in doubt for his existence ...

Yes the god is like santa. The God... thats another story here.

You know at least a half of everything? Even if yes, how do you know if God isn't in the other half?

My proof of validity of God's word is that cow breed cow and thats what been and thats what will. If someone wrote a letter to you and said. Hey Im Fred, and I had left you some money under that and that tree, and you would found that money there. It will not be a proof that this guy is Fred, but at least you could assume that a guy that claims to be fred is trustworthy. Right? Why would I not believe God if he proofs to be trustworthy in everything he says in his Bible?

Now take evolutionists. There are numbers of evidences of frauds made by evolutionists and no claim they make is provable truth. Sometimes to the contrary. And you defend them - that at least they try? Oh come on.............

My confidence of Gods word is coming from people like you actually. You say that there are claims, while there are none valid. Thats a desperation. You can try to find a proof of evolution. But every day of not finding anything gives me more and more confidence in my claims.

You claim that God is wrong.


He have done it like so: He made a Human kind. Human kind can only and will only produce humans. Some will be sick some will be asians some will be caucasian. But they are all humans. How do I know? Because the product of the intercourse is human. ALWAYS. Take every other kind there is ALWAYS the same kind.

That proves the creationism. You can call it what you like, but if you will not find evidence to the contrary GOD WORD IS PURE TRUTH here. Its a fact. And science deals with facts.

How did he do it? I do not have an idea. Actually I have but those are just hypothesis right now.

The one that talks about facts. One kind of animal produce the same kind and will always. Thats a fact. Isn't it? OMG if you have kids what do you expect - a duck? How more factual that could be that you expect human and can have 100% certainty.

Guess whats the offspring of a fly. Yeah a fly. Even if it would be bigger fly or smaller fly. Different colour fly, more haired fly. IT WILL BE A FLY! noone ever will or will experience something else.

You are willfuly ignorant. But our lord said there will be a lot of people willfuly ignorant of him in the last days.



Yes I can disprove it. In order for a proper spaghetti to occur, animals have to exist because spaghetti is made of animal parts and wheat.

So no testable evidence whatsoever, that's what I thought. You also can't disprove this: The giant spaghetti monster created all animals, can you? You see, you don't know what testable evidence or evidence is. ''Then God said, "Let the earth bring forth living creatures after their kind: cattle and creeping things and beasts of the earth after their kind"; and it was so.''

That's what you said, however you have to prove that god exists in the first place and then you would need to prove he actually said that and then prove that he actually did it, where is the proof for any of that? Just admit it, you believe in it because that's what you were told, there is no evidence for any of it. In fact why do you believe in the bible and not the other religious books? How did you determine that the bible was factual and the others aren't?

Complication of dna is rather a disprove of evolution at best. Its nowhere near to be a proof.


You do not need to wait millions of years to create fossils. You need a catastrophy. Like a global flood for example.

By the way. Its circular logic. Biologists reffers to geologist and geologist to biologists without checking validity of claims. Babilonian logic I say. Complicate things more, maybe you will build a tower to the sky of this absurd.


Thats not science. Its a priori.


24Then God said, "Let the earth bring forth living creatures after their kind: cattle and creeping things and beasts of the earth after their kind"; and it was so.

Yes peppered moth came from its kind a moth, not a banana given enough of time to pass. Sorry being mocking. Its asking for it.


Disease are there to help us gain health not for us to get away from them. Toxicity is the origin of disease. Do you think a bacteria is a danger to healthy individual? Pasteur even said that bacteria is nothing, the enviroment is everything.
Medicine right now is finding the benefit of having parasites. You have completly outdated informations my friend. Science is leaving your position to more enlighted one. We start to see the nature is not our enemy and not everyone try to kill us.


There could be some form of natural selection of those. I fully agree. That does not prove evolution that God is wrong what he says. But its not a mutation per se. Its a variation within a specie. Most of those variation can reverse. And it could be that young rats are activating their fenotypes within a genome, within a contact with a toxin.


Yes, because I have said it does not disprove this:

24Then God said, "Let the earth bring forth living creatures after their kind: cattle and creeping things and beasts of the earth after their kind"; and it was so.


Yes, there is no animal that does not aply to this:

24Then God said, "Let the earth bring forth living creatures after their kind: cattle and creeping things and beasts of the earth after their kind"; and it was so.


Yes I do. Look up.


No. I have said it because you had said that I fear death. I don't more than I fear God. Its a tautology of yours that I had destroyed. I had given a logical counter argument.

Discovering Dna, finding transitional fossils, matching traits to common ancestors or observing evolution over short timescales like the peppered moth but there are other examples worth pointing out. Our war against bacteria is rapidly producing highly resistant strains, leading to fears of a post-antibiotic era. Similarly, many animals are adapting to pesticides, including fruit flies and even rats. That's blind faith to you? Where is all the evidence for God? Real testable evidence, do you have any? Of course you don't, you said it yourself ''I could at least hope to be ressurected'' and that's why most people believe in what they believe, because of fear to accept reality.

Im more scared of God than of death. I could at least hope to be ressurected, as a true christian knows everyone goes to the same place - emptyness and nothingness until God decides differently.

The music of my life is recorded. Im recorded as a seed of music.

So yes. I will go there were you go - to Sheol. Later on I might be ressurected, or not (made a new, not as undead zombie) in a brand new world where everything is new, New Jerusalem. I have absolutely nothing to lose - you have.


You clearly are only the believer in what you say... And in that case, you are a blind believer not me, because you ignore there is no proofs while you claim there are. You close your eyes. Thats what I would define a blind believe, you reject the evidences to the contrary. I claim my believe does not have proof -YET, there are only evidences that helps me remain on my faith. There will be the proofs revealed as the Christ had said. Nothing hidden shall remain so.

I should actually thank you, because apriori evolution believers claiming they are aposteriori, are a joke that makes christian believe more in the message of the Lord. You clearly do not know what you talking about.


Listen to Kent Hovind you all evolutionists. You cannot state thats all of my claims, if I was not claiming those are my claims. You are deeply unhonourable and unfair here. You fight with ghosts. Fight with a real champion of creation mr Kent.

Either way I knew evolution was wrong waaaaay before I became a born again christian. So... yeah you do not have to be creationist to be deeply sceptical about whole of the evolution.


If you would know the bigger mythological background, you would know one thing. The snake aka dragon is an axis of conflict between many cultures. One are claiming it is good "deity" others claiming the thunderstruck from heaven is battling it.

So if you would be more sincere you could say, that a snake is the symbol of an adversarial axis - aka the adversary aka Satan.

You seem to claim that the adversary is good. Are you aware of it?

Who is not scared of death lol

I already showed in the other threads that most points in the talk origin link are based on outdated science and innacurate statements.

It more look like some old stuff of the 50's wrote by a guy illetrate in philosophy.

And even if they were wrong assumptions, they are still based on something unlike the bible which doesn't provide any type of evidence for anything it claims. You can't prove the flying spaghetti monster didn't do it either.
Read this for all your creationist claims against evolution: http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/list.html
There is definitely an answer there. Obviously you are just another religious fanatic. You are scared of death, I get it but believing in supernatural nonsense is not going to do you any good.

The thing is this matter of afterlife and soul immortality doesnt seem to be a central topic of the bible.

Its more present in things like tibetan book of the dead.


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bardo_Thodol


The Tibetan text describes, and is intended to guide one through, the experiences that the consciousness has after death, in the bardo, the interval between death and the next rebirth. The text also includes chapters on the signs of death and rituals to undertake when death is closing in or has taken place.

Three bardos   

Main article: Bardo

The Bardo Thodol differentiates the intermediate state between lives into three bardos:

The chikhai bardo or "bardo of the moment of death", which features the experience of the "clear light of reality", or at least the nearest approximation of which one is spiritually capable;

The chonyid bardo or "bardo of the experiencing of reality", which features the experience of visions of various Buddha forms, or the nearest approximations of which one is capable;

The sidpa bardo or "bardo of rebirth", which features karmically impelled hallucinations which eventually result in rebirth, typically yab-yum imagery of men and women passionately entwined.

The Liberation Through Hearing During the Intermediate State also mentions three other bardos:[note 3]

"Life", or ordinary waking consciousness;
"Dhyana" (meditation);
"Dream", the dream state during normal sleep.

Together these "six bardos" form a classification of states of consciousness into six broad types. Any state of consciousness can form a type of "intermediate state", intermediate between other states of consciousness. Indeed, one can consider any momentary state of consciousness a bardo, since it lies between our past and future existences; it provides us with the opportunity to experience reality, which is always present but obscured by the projections and confusions that are due to our previous unskillful actions.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bardo

In some schools of Buddhism, bardo (Tibetan བར་དོ་ Wylie: bar do) or antarabhāva (Sanskrit) is an intermediate, transitional, or liminal state between death and rebirth. It is a concept which arose soon after the Buddha's passing, with a number of earlier Buddhist groups accepting the existence of such an intermediate state, while other schools rejected it. In Tibetan Buddhism, bardo is the central theme of the Bardo Thodol (lit. Liberation Through Hearing During the Intermediate State), the Tibetan Book of the Dead.

The six days of the Genesis are not earth days. The first day was before sun & earth was created.

The snakes and relation to fruit of tree of knowledge is reference to more ancient myth. The snakes in egypt are often associated with wisdom or enlightment. Or intermediate between knowledge / light and human mind.

Like wadjet ( https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wadjet )

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uraeus

The Uraeus (/jʊˈriəs/;[1] plural Uraei or Uraeuses; from the Greek oὐραῖoς, ouraîos, "on its tail"; from Egyptian jʿr.t (iaret), "rearing cobra") is the stylized, upright form of an Egyptian cobra (asp, serpent, or snake), used as a symbol of sovereignty, royalty, deity and divine authority in ancient Egypt.

The whole old testament is reference to older myth from egypt or babylon.

Tiamat is also one of the ancient myth often refered in old testament.

http://biologos.org/blogs/archive/genesis-1-and-a-babylonian-creation-story

This way to think about the creation of the cosmos was very common in these times.


The thing of death and ressurection also have their own meaning in esoteric / gnostic teaching, the bible make many references to this process, and im pretty sure there will be evidence of this coming from neurology and noetic science in the next decade.

There are already more and more study of this in psychology / psychiatry / neurology.

The meaning of the rib from original hebrew is not that clear either.

I suggest you make another topic and give me your best shot at this. Then I make my post and destroy all your claims? How about that.

What do I mean in saying, it does not answer anything? Its just gives story based on wrong assuptions. What is worse in evolution is that I can prove your assumptions being wrong. You can't prove God did not make it.

Everything is always within the same kind. There was no speciation that would produce infertile offspring within a kind. Ofcourse there is a ring specie, but it does not prove anything as it can easily prove creationism as well.

There is a natural selection - I agree. But that is nowhere near to prove evolution, as there is no proven fact of beneficiary mutation that create new specie. I do not mean subspecie like wolf and dog that can breed to give wolfdog, but a mutation that can make dog or any other animal, worm, insect to be unable to reproduce within its kind, even be it thousands of years (even with some species that reproduce fast like insect that are given radioactive isotopes or so).

You believe that - that has not happened - ever. And will not happen. Just like fully sentient AI. Its a wet dream of atheists.


Just a secondhand opinion. I had not made my own.