Can sciences prove the existence of God ?

in response to ur original post.

it is a matter of statistics..
if we didnt have all the necesery function to survive.. or if we didnt develop them through evolution. we wuold just become extinct.. lots of animals have become exctinct.. cos their bodies were not compatible for their way of living.. statistically out of all the animals to have ever been on earth.. some of them are gonna survive if we are all programmed differently..

are u suggesting that if an animal goes extinct that god there for fucked up when designing it?
 
"Peter and the two sons of Zebedee were with Jesus Christ before the elders of the people and the chief priests came to take him to crucify him. Jesus at this point talked to Peter and the two sons of Zebedee as in Matthew 26:38 "Then saith he unto them, My soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death: tarry ye here, and watch with me." Then Jesus went a little further way from them and prayed to God as in Matthew 26:39 "And he went a little farther, and fell on his face, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt."
It is very clear from the above verse in Matthew 26:39 that Jesus had no intention of dying. In this verse it is shown that Jesus was praying strongly (Matthew mentions that Jesus repeated these prayer three time) to have this death removed from him. Had Jesus Christ been sent to be crucified he would not have hesitated to be killed at all. When I relate this to my Christian friends, they tell me that this hesitation comes from the flesh side of him (in other words he was tempted), and that his soul which is godly does not have this hesitation at all. When we look at Matthew 26:38 we see that Jesus is contradicting this idea by saying, "My soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death." (Matthew 26:3. He himself says that it really his soul that is hesitating and not his body. These are Jesus' own words."


just a random paragraph from your "proof"...

this is just some 1 analyzing the bible.. i could go and analyze the lion the witch and wardrobe.. doesn't mean it happened...
 
pinkporridge said:
"Peter and the two sons of Zebedee were with Jesus Christ before the elders of the people and the chief priests came to take him to crucify him. Jesus at this point talked to Peter and the two sons of Zebedee as in Matthew 26:38 "Then saith he unto them, My soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death: tarry ye here, and watch with me." Then Jesus went a little further way from them and prayed to God as in Matthew 26:39 "And he went a little farther, and fell on his face, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt."
It is very clear from the above verse in Matthew 26:39 that Jesus had no intention of dying. In this verse it is shown that Jesus was praying strongly (Matthew mentions that Jesus repeated these prayer three time) to have this death removed from him. Had Jesus Christ been sent to be crucified he would not have hesitated to be killed at all. When I relate this to my Christian friends, they tell me that this hesitation comes from the flesh side of him (in other words he was tempted), and that his soul which is godly does not have this hesitation at all. When we look at Matthew 26:38 we see that Jesus is contradicting this idea by saying, "My soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death." (Matthew 26:3. He himself says that it really his soul that is hesitating and not his body. These are Jesus' own words."


just a random paragraph from your "proof"...

this is just some 1 analyzing the bible.. i could go and analyze the lion the witch and wardrobe.. doesn't mean it happened...
Click to expand...


a "random" paragraph ???
 
It is easy to find many passages in the Bible where Jesus is called Son of God. One is also able to find a few passages where Jesus calls himself the Son of God, or where he calls God his father. However, a careful study of the Bible reveals that this is the result of changes in the Bible. Jesus never claimed that he is the Son of God.

Each time an older manuscript of the Bible is discovered, many changes are required in the Bible to bring it in line with the ancient manuscripts. Mark 1:1 reads as follows:

“The beginning of the Gospel about Jesus Christ, the Son of God.b” (Mark 1:1, New International Version).

At the end of that verse, there is a small letter directing us to look at the footnote at the bottom of the page. There we find that some manuscripts do not have “the Son of God.” And those were ancient, reliable manuscripts. The evidence was so compelling that the editors of one Bible just simply removed the title Son of God from the verse altogether. Thus in the New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures the verse reads:

“The beginning of the good news about Jesus Christ” (Mark 1:1).

The title ‘Son of God’ is no longer in that verse.

"Another such change had to be made in the Acts of the Apostles 8:37 in every honest translation of the Bible prepared in this century. Evidence from old manuscripts demanded that the verse be removed from all present Bibles. If you go to your New International Version Bible and look for Acts 8:37 you will not find it in the text. You will find verse number 36, and then verse 38, but not 37. If you wish to know what verse 37 used to say, you need to check the footnote at the bottom of the page. This verse used to contain a confession that Jesus is the Son of God. It had to be removed because its absence from the most ancient manuscripts meant that someone added it to the later manuscripts."

more studying of the bible... just saying..infact every page i looked at was studying the bible...
 
StanJon said:
The God of Abraham and Issac is the true God. But that's another story.
Click to expand...


You just furthered my point. The title of the thread is "Can SCIENCES prove the existence of God?" Scripture is not science...it's from religious text. No one has said anything SCIENTIFIC or using SCIENCE to prove their point...it's just a bunch of slinging of scripture back and forth...which is fine if you're in a religious debate. However not if you're talking about science...sorry SCIENCE proving the existence of God.

Basically you're all off topic! :24:

...and now I'm off to post something in the 'Anal' thread...
 
Does anyone have training wheels that can be screwed onto someone's thinking?



This guy doesn't even know what the meaning of "proof" is.

"Science cannot directly prove the divine!" He said. But then he gives us fundie sties saying it is proof. Oh man I may just skip my afternoon classes to watch this clown show.
 
Back
Top