So after 300 pages, still no proof Superman exists? 
Humanity has been discussing this issue for centuries. Humanity still did not find any evidence
Topic: Scientific proof that God exists? - page 223. (Read 845809 times)
Humanity has been discussing this issue for centuries. Humanity still did not find any evidence
Wrong. First there is the evidence and proof that God exists:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.10718395
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.14047133
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1662153.40
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.16803380.
Then there is the proof of the strength of God, the Bible, through the history of its being written and compiled, the strengths (and weaknesses) of the nation (Israel) that did it, and the fact of the Bible prophesies that have been and are being fulfilled.
If this is blind faith, forget about weak blind faith things like big bang theory, black hole theory, and relativity theory.
And there you go again, using your own words as proof.
Chuckles you really should try something new.
Your words do not make something true. You use assumptions to "justify" what you believe.
There you go again, ignoring the laws of science expressed by my proof words. When are you going to get around to rebutting the proof? Oh, that's right. You can't. Because the proof is true. All you can do is blab away like a politician.
That's okay though. The more blabbing you do without rebutting the proof, the more you strengthen the proof in the minds of others, and the more you show your inability to think very deeply.
I believe you have been rebutted numerous times. Yet you fail to see the answers and continue to claim you assumptions as proof.
You are a funny little man Chuckles.
So after 300 pages, still no proof Superman exists?
God always exist to someone who needs him. If you happen not to need him, he's out of your life.
If you notice most of the people who are worshiping in the churches are the ones who needs something and god needs them to that's why they gave money to these priests.
If you notice most of the people who are worshiping in the churches are the ones who needs something and god needs them to that's why they gave money to these priests.
They give money and little boys to priests.
Why do you always try to equate the Catholic Church with God? Is it because they talk god a lot? Is it because they say they are God's representative? Is it because that's one way you can attempt to shed bad light on god.
Wake up. No church is God. Rather, the church follows God, or they are liars if they don't yet say they do.
God always exist to someone who needs him. If you happen not to need him, he's out of your life.
If you notice most of the people who are worshiping in the churches are the ones who needs something and god needs them to that's why they gave money to these priests.
If you notice most of the people who are worshiping in the churches are the ones who needs something and god needs them to that's why they gave money to these priests.
They give money and little boys to priests.
My thoughts on God and why a God must exist.
1. I don't believe in magic or magic men. If there is a God, he follows laws of the universe like everything else.
2. Cells and all living things each have awareness, a spirit or something that makes them "live". Man has not or ever will create this on their own unless they posses the powers of this God of which we speak. A cell operates like an independent city constructed specifically to achieve many tasks. The cell operates not as a chemical reaction but a sentient entity. Just like all living organisms.
3. Without a God, all of the organized living machines are nothing more than the random creations of atoms aligning by coincidence, ultimately creating incredibly complex living machines. This has never been actually observed or recreated.
1. I don't believe in magic or magic men. If there is a God, he follows laws of the universe like everything else.
2. Cells and all living things each have awareness, a spirit or something that makes them "live". Man has not or ever will create this on their own unless they posses the powers of this God of which we speak. A cell operates like an independent city constructed specifically to achieve many tasks. The cell operates not as a chemical reaction but a sentient entity. Just like all living organisms.
3. Without a God, all of the organized living machines are nothing more than the random creations of atoms aligning by coincidence, ultimately creating incredibly complex living machines. This has never been actually observed or recreated.
Wrong. First there is the evidence and proof that God exists:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.10718395
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.14047133
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1662153.40
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.16803380.
Then there is the proof of the strength of God, the Bible, through the history of its being written and compiled, the strengths (and weaknesses) of the nation (Israel) that did it, and the fact of the Bible prophesies that have been and are being fulfilled.
If this is blind faith, forget about weak blind faith things like big bang theory, black hole theory, and relativity theory.
And there you go again, using your own words as proof.
Chuckles you really should try something new.
Your words do not make something true. You use assumptions to "justify" what you believe.
There you go again, ignoring the laws of science expressed by my proof words. When are you going to get around to rebutting the proof? Oh, that's right. You can't. Because the proof is true. All you can do is blab away like a politician.
That's okay though. The more blabbing you do without rebutting the proof, the more you strengthen the proof in the minds of others, and the more you show your inability to think very deeply.
God always exist to someone who needs him. If you happen not to need him, he's out of your life.
If you notice most of the people who are worshiping in the churches are the ones who needs something and god needs them to that's why they gave money to these priests.
If you notice most of the people who are worshiping in the churches are the ones who needs something and god needs them to that's why they gave money to these priests.
Wrong. First there is the evidence and proof that God exists:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.10718395
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.14047133
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1662153.40
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.16803380.
Then there is the proof of the strength of God, the Bible, through the history of its being written and compiled, the strengths (and weaknesses) of the nation (Israel) that did it, and the fact of the Bible prophesies that have been and are being fulfilled.
If this is blind faith, forget about weak blind faith things like big bang theory, black hole theory, and relativity theory.
And there you go again, using your own words as proof.
Chuckles you really should try something new.
Your words do not make something true. You use assumptions to "justify" what you believe.
Personally I think those trying to obtain scientific proof of the existence of god are approaching this from the wrong perspective, you believe in god proof or not proof.
+1
Spot on. It's called faith, a belief that is not based on proof.
Science can never proof God, not now and never will, because science can only use empirical data.
Anybody claiming or trying to obtain scientfic proof of God is:
1) Lying or plain ignorant of science.
2) Too much spare time on their hands.
3) Having some sort of faith breakdown. Ask yourself, why would somebody of faith need (or even seek) scientfic proof of God? Surely that's the whole point of faith? Seems to me, if someone does, they are in the middle of some sort of God faith crisis in their life. Pretending they have scientfic proof of God, is just a cry for help.
3) Because blind faith is never strong. It might be vocal, but it is not strong.
Faith in God is faith in what He says. If you want to simply believe that He exists, your faith is rather blind. Get to KNOW that He exists, so you have opportunity to listen to what He says. Then you can believe in Him or not.
But all religion is the definition of blind faith. People choose to believe stories in a book written years ago without ever seeing anything first hand.
Wrong. First there is the evidence and proof that God exists:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.10718395
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.14047133
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1662153.40
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.16803380.
Then there is the proof of the strength of God, the Bible, through the history of its being written and compiled, the strengths (and weaknesses) of the nation (Israel) that did it, and the fact of the Bible prophesies that have been and are being fulfilled.
If this is blind faith, forget about weak blind faith things like big bang theory, black hole theory, and relativity theory.
Simply stating that something is wrong and then pointing to your own posts on other threads does not make you correct, as others on this forum have pointed out a number of times to you.
You only need to look four posts above to Buffer Overflows comments to see how flawed your argument is.
It doesn't matter to me what you believe. My posts are there for you to research what I have said... IF YOU SO DESIRE. If you don't accept the facts I point out, that's your business.
No, it quite clearly matters to you what others believe, as you push your religious agenda on everyone not of your faith at every opportunity you get on this forum.
Personally I think those trying to obtain scientific proof of the existence of god are approaching this from the wrong perspective, you believe in god proof or not proof.
+1
Spot on. It's called faith, a belief that is not based on proof.
Science can never proof God, not now and never will, because science can only use empirical data.
Anybody claiming or trying to obtain scientfic proof of God is:
1) Lying or plain ignorant of science.
2) Too much spare time on their hands.
3) Having some sort of faith breakdown. Ask yourself, why would somebody of faith need (or even seek) scientfic proof of God? Surely that's the whole point of faith? Seems to me, if someone does, they are in the middle of some sort of God faith crisis in their life. Pretending they have scientfic proof of God, is just a cry for help.
3) Because blind faith is never strong. It might be vocal, but it is not strong.
Faith in God is faith in what He says. If you want to simply believe that He exists, your faith is rather blind. Get to KNOW that He exists, so you have opportunity to listen to what He says. Then you can believe in Him or not.
But all religion is the definition of blind faith. People choose to believe stories in a book written years ago without ever seeing anything first hand.
Wrong. First there is the evidence and proof that God exists:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.10718395
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.14047133
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1662153.40
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.16803380.
Then there is the proof of the strength of God, the Bible, through the history of its being written and compiled, the strengths (and weaknesses) of the nation (Israel) that did it, and the fact of the Bible prophesies that have been and are being fulfilled.
If this is blind faith, forget about weak blind faith things like big bang theory, black hole theory, and relativity theory.
Simply stating that something is wrong and then pointing to your own posts on other threads does not make you correct, as others on this forum have pointed out a number of times to you.
You only need to look four posts above to Buffer Overflows comments to see how flawed your argument is.
It doesn't matter to me what you believe. My posts are there for you to research what I have said... IF YOU SO DESIRE. If you don't accept the facts I point out, that's your business.
Personally I think those trying to obtain scientific proof of the existence of god are approaching this from the wrong perspective, you believe in god proof or not proof.
+1
Spot on. It's called faith, a belief that is not based on proof.
Science can never proof God, not now and never will, because science can only use empirical data.
Anybody claiming or trying to obtain scientfic proof of God is:
1) Lying or plain ignorant of science.
2) Too much spare time on their hands.
3) Having some sort of faith breakdown. Ask yourself, why would somebody of faith need (or even seek) scientfic proof of God? Surely that's the whole point of faith? Seems to me, if someone does, they are in the middle of some sort of God faith crisis in their life. Pretending they have scientfic proof of God, is just a cry for help.
3) Because blind faith is never strong. It might be vocal, but it is not strong.
Faith in God is faith in what He says. If you want to simply believe that He exists, your faith is rather blind. Get to KNOW that He exists, so you have opportunity to listen to what He says. Then you can believe in Him or not.
But all religion is the definition of blind faith. People choose to believe stories in a book written years ago without ever seeing anything first hand.
Wrong. First there is the evidence and proof that God exists:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.10718395
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.14047133
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1662153.40
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.16803380.
Then there is the proof of the strength of God, the Bible, through the history of its being written and compiled, the strengths (and weaknesses) of the nation (Israel) that did it, and the fact of the Bible prophesies that have been and are being fulfilled.
If this is blind faith, forget about weak blind faith things like big bang theory, black hole theory, and relativity theory.
Simply stating that something is wrong and then pointing to your own posts on other threads does not make you correct, as others on this forum have pointed out a number of times to you.
You only need to look four posts above to Buffer Overflows comments to see how flawed your argument is.
Personally I think those trying to obtain scientific proof of the existence of god are approaching this from the wrong perspective, you believe in god proof or not proof.
+1
Spot on. It's called faith, a belief that is not based on proof.
Science can never proof God, not now and never will, because science can only use empirical data.
Anybody claiming or trying to obtain scientfic proof of God is:
1) Lying or plain ignorant of science.
2) Too much spare time on their hands.
3) Having some sort of faith breakdown. Ask yourself, why would somebody of faith need (or even seek) scientfic proof of God? Surely that's the whole point of faith? Seems to me, if someone does, they are in the middle of some sort of God faith crisis in their life. Pretending they have scientfic proof of God, is just a cry for help.
3) Because blind faith is never strong. It might be vocal, but it is not strong.
Faith in God is faith in what He says. If you want to simply believe that He exists, your faith is rather blind. Get to KNOW that He exists, so you have opportunity to listen to what He says. Then you can believe in Him or not.
But all religion is the definition of blind faith. People choose to believe stories in a book written years ago without ever seeing anything first hand.
Claiming the bible (or any other claimed holy book for that matter) is the "word of God" is a circular argument based on 100% blind faith.
In order to know if the bible is the "word of God", you would first need to check it against the "word of God" to make sure. (Assuming there is such a thing anyway.)
Of course once someone claims something is the "word of God", then anything could be the "word of God". Am I speaking the "word of God"? Seems to me people just pick and choose what is the "word of God" is to suit themselves.
Some dishonest people claim the bible must be the "word of God" because it's actual existance is impossible, so it's a miracle. Well what does that mean? Obviously it does exist, so it's not impossible.
Now, once you open up the notion of miracles existing, then you have to accept that other miracles can happen, so then impossible things aren't impossible anymore.
But, guess what.....
They then claim that evolution is impossible, and go all funny when you say "well it must be a miracle".
Blind faith is foolish faith.
Very nicely put!
My sentiment also.
Personally I think those trying to obtain scientific proof of the existence of god are approaching this from the wrong perspective, you believe in god proof or not proof.
+1
Spot on. It's called faith, a belief that is not based on proof.
Science can never proof God, not now and never will, because science can only use empirical data.
Anybody claiming or trying to obtain scientfic proof of God is:
1) Lying or plain ignorant of science.
2) Too much spare time on their hands.
3) Having some sort of faith breakdown. Ask yourself, why would somebody of faith need (or even seek) scientfic proof of God? Surely that's the whole point of faith? Seems to me, if someone does, they are in the middle of some sort of God faith crisis in their life. Pretending they have scientfic proof of God, is just a cry for help.
3) Because blind faith is never strong. It might be vocal, but it is not strong.
Faith in God is faith in what He says. If you want to simply believe that He exists, your faith is rather blind. Get to KNOW that He exists, so you have opportunity to listen to what He says. Then you can believe in Him or not.
But all religion is the definition of blind faith. People choose to believe stories in a book written years ago without ever seeing anything first hand.
Wrong. First there is the evidence and proof that God exists:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.10718395
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.14047133
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1662153.40
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.16803380.
Then there is the proof of the strength of God, the Bible, through the history of its being written and compiled, the strengths (and weaknesses) of the nation (Israel) that did it, and the fact of the Bible prophesies that have been and are being fulfilled.
If this is blind faith, forget about weak blind faith things like big bang theory, black hole theory, and relativity theory.
Personally I think those trying to obtain scientific proof of the existence of god are approaching this from the wrong perspective, you believe in god proof or not proof.
+1
Spot on. It's called faith, a belief that is not based on proof.
Science can never proof God, not now and never will, because science can only use empirical data.
Anybody claiming or trying to obtain scientfic proof of God is:
1) Lying or plain ignorant of science.
2) Too much spare time on their hands.
3) Having some sort of faith breakdown. Ask yourself, why would somebody of faith need (or even seek) scientfic proof of God? Surely that's the whole point of faith? Seems to me, if someone does, they are in the middle of some sort of God faith crisis in their life. Pretending they have scientfic proof of God, is just a cry for help.
3) Because blind faith is never strong. It might be vocal, but it is not strong.
Faith in God is faith in what He says. If you want to simply believe that He exists, your faith is rather blind. Get to KNOW that He exists, so you have opportunity to listen to what He says. Then you can believe in Him or not.
But all religion is the definition of blind faith. People choose to believe stories in a book written years ago without ever seeing anything first hand.
Claiming the bible (or any other claimed holy book for that matter) is the "word of God" is a circular argument based on 100% blind faith.
In order to know if the bible is the "word of God", you would first need to check it against the "word of God" to make sure. (Assuming there is such a thing anyway.)
Of course once someone claims something is the "word of God", then anything could be the "word of God". Am I speaking the "word of God"? Seems to me people just pick and choose what is the "word of God" is to suit themselves.
Some dishonest people claim the bible must be the "word of God" because it's actual existance is impossible, so it's a miracle. Well what does that mean? Obviously it does exist, so it's not impossible.
Now, once you open up the notion of miracles existing, then you have to accept that other miracles can happen, so then impossible things aren't impossible anymore.
But, guess what.....
They then claim that evolution is impossible, and go all funny when you say "well it must be a miracle".
Blind faith is foolish faith.
Very nicely put!
Personally I think those trying to obtain scientific proof of the existence of god are approaching this from the wrong perspective, you believe in god proof or not proof.
+1
Spot on. It's called faith, a belief that is not based on proof.
Science can never proof God, not now and never will, because science can only use empirical data.
Anybody claiming or trying to obtain scientfic proof of God is:
1) Lying or plain ignorant of science.
2) Too much spare time on their hands.
3) Having some sort of faith breakdown. Ask yourself, why would somebody of faith need (or even seek) scientfic proof of God? Surely that's the whole point of faith? Seems to me, if someone does, they are in the middle of some sort of God faith crisis in their life. Pretending they have scientfic proof of God, is just a cry for help.
3) Because blind faith is never strong. It might be vocal, but it is not strong.
Faith in God is faith in what He says. If you want to simply believe that He exists, your faith is rather blind. Get to KNOW that He exists, so you have opportunity to listen to what He says. Then you can believe in Him or not.
But all religion is the definition of blind faith. People choose to believe stories in a book written years ago without ever seeing anything first hand.
Claiming the bible (or any other claimed holy book for that matter) is the "word of God" is a circular argument based on 100% blind faith.
In order to know if the bible is the "word of God", you would first need to check it against the "word of God" to make sure. (Assuming there is such a thing anyway.)
Of course once someone claims something is the "word of God", then anything could be the "word of God". Am I speaking the "word of God"? Seems to me people just pick and choose what is the "word of God" is to suit themselves.
Some dishonest people claim the bible must be the "word of God" because it's actual existance is impossible, so it's a miracle. Well what does that mean? Obviously it does exist, so it's not impossible.
Now, once you open up the notion of miracles existing, then you have to accept that other miracles can happen, so then impossible things aren't impossible anymore.
But, guess what.....
They then claim that evolution is impossible, and go all funny when you say "well it must be a miracle".
Blind faith is foolish faith.
Personally I think those trying to obtain scientific proof of the existence of god are approaching this from the wrong perspective, you believe in god proof or not proof.
+1
Spot on. It's called faith, a belief that is not based on proof.
Science can never proof God, not now and never will, because science can only use empirical data.
Anybody claiming or trying to obtain scientfic proof of God is:
1) Lying or plain ignorant of science.
2) Too much spare time on their hands.
3) Having some sort of faith breakdown. Ask yourself, why would somebody of faith need (or even seek) scientfic proof of God? Surely that's the whole point of faith? Seems to me, if someone does, they are in the middle of some sort of God faith crisis in their life. Pretending they have scientfic proof of God, is just a cry for help.
3) Because blind faith is never strong. It might be vocal, but it is not strong.
Faith in God is faith in what He says. If you want to simply believe that He exists, your faith is rather blind. Get to KNOW that He exists, so you have opportunity to listen to what He says. Then you can believe in Him or not.
But all religion is the definition of blind faith. People choose to believe stories in a book written years ago without ever seeing anything first hand.
Personally I think those trying to obtain scientific proof of the existence of god are approaching this from the wrong perspective, you believe in god proof or not proof.
+1
Spot on. It's called faith, a belief that is not based on proof.
Science can never proof God, not now and never will, because science can only use empirical data.
Anybody claiming or trying to obtain scientfic proof of God is:
1) Lying or plain ignorant of science.
2) Too much spare time on their hands.
3) Having some sort of faith breakdown. Ask yourself, why would somebody of faith need (or even seek) scientfic proof of God? Surely that's the whole point of faith? Seems to me, if someone does, they are in the middle of some sort of God faith crisis in their life. Pretending they have scientfic proof of God, is just a cry for help.
3) Because blind faith is never strong. It might be vocal, but it is not strong.
Faith in God is faith in what He says. If you want to simply believe that He exists, your faith is rather blind. Get to KNOW that He exists, so you have opportunity to listen to what He says. Then you can believe in Him or not.
Personally I think those trying to obtain scientific proof of the existence of god are approaching this from the wrong perspective, you believe in god proof or not proof.
+1
Spot on. It's called faith, a belief that is not based on proof.
Science can never proof God, not now and never will, because science can only use empirical data.
Anybody claiming or trying to obtain scientfic proof of God is:
1) Lying or plain ignorant of science.
2) Too much spare time on their hands.
3) Having some sort of faith breakdown. Ask yourself, why would somebody of faith need (or even seek) scientfic proof of God? Surely that's the whole point of faith? Seems to me, if someone does, they are in the middle of some sort of God faith crisis in their life. Pretending they have scientfic proof of God, is just a cry for help.
Personally I think those trying to obtain scientific proof of the existence of god are approaching this from the wrong perspective, you believe in god proof or not proof.
What does a person mean when he says he believes or doesn't believe in God?
What I mean is, can a person believe in something that he doesn't have any evidence for, at all?
For example, what would it mean to believe in the planet Mars? Does it mean that you believe Mars exists? Does it mean you believe in the promise of colonization? Does it mean that if Mars talked to you, you would believe what it said?
Make the distinction about believing in God. Believe that He doesn't exist, and ignore the rest about Him. Or...
Believe that He exists without knowing it. Or...
Know that He exists, and then believe the unproven things about Him. Or...
Know that He exists and believe what He tells you in the Bible.
Actually, you can clarify this even further if you want. But simply saying that you believe in God, or that you don't believe in God, says very little about what you believe or don't believe.
I'm God BADecker. I'm writing it down now so you can see it in print. You don't have to believe in second hand stories written down by third parties and handed down over two thousand years. This is first hand proof straight from the mouth of God. I will answer your prayers as well and as quickly as they have ever been answered.
If you refuse to believe that I'm God then I will condem you to an eternity of agony in burning hell fire when you die. Prove that I'm not God!
Jump to: