Topic: Scientific proof that God exists? - page 453. (Read 845654 times)

I'm really having a hard time here. What I mean is, if God didn't exist, that is, if it were a for-real, proven fact that God didn't exist, that would clarify some things. But it hasn't been proven that God does NOT exist.

Now, since we don't have a way of scientifically proving that God does or doesn't exist, I am having a hard time understanding how foolish some of these bold people can be, that they would mock God. I mean, what if He exists?

If God doesn't exist, any reverence for Him that I might show would be wasted. If the reverence happened to be in the form of $money that I donated to a church, then I would at least be donating to the support of some preacher. It would be like I was helping him and his family to live, no matter how ignorant and foolish they were. And I could feel a little bit of pride in that.

But what if God DOES exist? You don't REALLY know that He doesn't. Some of you should be a little more quiet, rather than mocking of something you don't know.

If there is a God, there is a good chance that He isn't just a little bit God, but that He just might be God Almighty. You are going to die in a few years. If you don't honor the idea of God existing, and He DOES exist, He has all time to mess with you if He wants. I would think THAT would induce a little respect of the idea, so at least you would act civilly towards the idea.

If it ever gets proven that there is NO God, then you have all the time you want to freely mock.  But until you have the proof, how can you be so foolish as to tempt something that might be as great as God? Some of your fellow mockers who have departed this life, might already be suffering in great pain and agony, on some other planet, in some other dimension, totally outside of your sight.

You want respect. What if God exists, and wants respect a thousand times more than you do?

I asserted God to be the acme of "minimum entropy state."

I think that the general consensus would be the God of the Bible. Basically, because of the history of the English speaking peoples, and this being an English speaking forum, it would probably be the God of the Bible.



EDIT: All right. Recent history of the English speaking peoples.

are we talking about God Fro the Bible or just a general God that created us?

As someone who hasn't moved out of their parents' house yet I resent that stereotype

Don't be gullible! Read Spencer's First Principles and if you are wise, your intellect will be able to prove something remarkable. Also study this guy, one of the most objective thinkers of our time:



Even with much education, one can be so mistaken, and very error-prone. Wow.

If Dicksperiment proves he has 50btc, I'll take him up on the offer and sell him Vod's info.

This is one of the scientific proofs that God exists. Here's how.

Up until recently, science has mostly ignored the idea of the soul. Sure, science is into psychology, but the idea of a soul as an objective "something" has always had its problems in the scientific community. Part of the reason for this is that nobody has any kind of a handle on how to scientifically investigate a soul.

Most of the religious community, and of almost every religion, accepts that there is a soul. It is accepted second nature. Even some non-religious philosophies consider the soul to exist. Here is the point. Since science doesn't have a handle on the soul, DOESN'T mean that the soul doesn't exist.

For example. Electricity is something that we have theory for nowadays. But science knew that electricity existed long before there was theory for it. Science expected theory for it. Science looked for theory for it. But we used electricity for a long time before ANYBODY understood what it was.

What does this have to do with proving God? The souls of people are the things that affect the minds of people in such a way that says - to some people - that God exists. So far, the science for the soul is very weak. The science that exists for the soul allows that there is God, and at the same time allows that there is not God, depending on whose soul it is that is acting - causing the believing. This is because there isn't enough science to say one way or the other about the soul, and it is the soul that has to do with the God connection.

Until such a time that there is clear scientific examination of the soul, we can only conclude that, for the believers in God, God REALLY does exist. Why? Because it might be that God DOES exist, and scientifically examining the soul just might prove it.

Now, if God really does exist, like you an I do, He just might come and prove to the non-believers that He is real. But until that time comes, He DOES exist at the same time that He DOES NOT exist, depending on who is considering the question.



EDIT: Something like this is difficult to talk about clearly. I wish that I had more time to get into it.

Ha!! Scientific proof? why do you need science to prove that god exists if you believe that he exists that is more than enough.

I misunderstood your argument, my bad.  You are simply using the god of the gaps.  There are many ways that the minimum entropy state could have come about, and since we don't know you're throwing god in there.

For example, the big crunch theory:

LOL.  There is zero evidence for intelligent design.  Educate yourself.  

Right now there's a bunch of evidence for intelligent design and not so much for evolution. However, really, Science cannot prove anything. Science. Cannot. Prove. God. It can allude to a god (small g) but it would be the result of undiscovered aliens (hey, possible). Evolution could be true, although it's simply very, very unlikely. Christianity has good evidence for it - but all that evidence, since you believe that the improbable big bang happened, could, once again, be chance.

You cannot prove something you weren't there to witness.

Died from laughing. God resurrected me. Jk.

(The second segment of emboldened text was highlighted by "cooldgamer.")
That demonstrates my final assertion above: God would be the ultimate manifestation of that order within existence.

In a closed system entropy does increase, buuut...

I am one known a measure of privacy about their affairs.

Are you unemployed?

Concede you, therefore, the relative validity of my assertions?

Not interested, busy collecting data to send vod to the hell he should burn in.

Care to elucidate?