Can sciences prove the existence of God ?

[Sylviane88]

And like Tim said- perhaps the first time I've agreed with him- who's to say that your God is the "right" god? Maybe the Egyptians had it right. Or the Greeks. Or the Incas.

http://www.offtopicz.net/43844-can-sciences-prove-existence-god.html#post1057285

 

[333halfabeast]

There is no burden of proof in faith and if your faith needs scripture or scientific fact to validate it, then it is not faith. I think everyone including Atheist can agree that there is a driving force in the universe, whether it is energy transference or a omniscient and powerful being, there is still a driving force. So if you find balance and comfort in your life by calling that force "God" and having dogma and ritual surround it great, if you prefer to just think it is the physical nature of things, great. Either way, why would there be any need of burden of proof? It is unprovable and in ultimately just an inner spirituality that gleans your consciousness.

 

[All Else Failed]

Mr "all else Failed" my examples are clear and known by anyone ! why should I show some scientifics journals ? did you find something against the current science ?



Yes I read it and it was totally offtopic ! I know that: now, the immune system "as an integrated system" can evolve the quality of some of its components. but how about it before it was an integrated complex system ? before it was even a system ? where did its integration come from ?



You and and all the atheists say so ! before the human existed, wasn't "the immune system" nothing ? so how did it evolve from nothing to the current format ?



:surrenderTruly all else failed !




Again, let me tell you that I'm not christian ! therefore I don't believe in the biblical verse saying "something cannot come from nothing" ... In Islam and like what is shown in the Quran, God can create somthing from nothing .. and can render something nothing ! ( ps: Einstein proved something like this in his famous theory: e=mc2 ) .. and again, do not overpass the limits of your mind by such questions while you cannot even tell me what is the nature of fire ! :thumbup

I would ask you for reputable scientific journals because you're asking me for scientific proof of things, so I'm asking YOU to back up your claims as well. Not just cite holy texts which are proof of nothing.


You're lying, you didn't read my links or you would see how I am right. The immune system started out as a very simple system and got more complex as evolution developed it. Its not that hard to understand. You're studying medicine and they never explained this to you?


I never said that the immune system came from "nothing". Actually, there can never really be "nothing because there are things called "virtual particles" which are always present. So its fallacy to say "well there was nothing so how did life begin out of nothing, atheist!". The truth is, is that matter has always been. Even if you have a "vacuum" in space, there is still matter in it.


I suggest you read up on virtual particles:

Some Frequently Asked Questions About Virtual Particles



No see, you DO believe in the statement that "something cannot come from nothing" because you accuse atheists of believing this. You say "how did the universe get here? Where did creation come from?". You think atheists believe that it all came from nothing, but you're wrong in accusing us of this.



Did you even read this link I provided?: http://www.stanford.edu/~alinde/1032226.pdf

There is no burden of proof in faith and if your faith needs scripture or scientific fact to validate it, then it is not faith. I think everyone including Atheist can agree that there is a driving force in the universe, whether it is energy transference or a omniscient and powerful being, there is still a driving force. So if you find balance and comfort in your life by calling that force "God" and having dogma and ritual surround it great, if you prefer to just think it is the physical nature of things, great. Either way, why would there be any need of burden of proof? It is unprovable and in ultimately just an inner spirituality that gleans your consciousness.

If a believer in god tells someone that "I believed in a cosmic sky daddy, and you should believe in him", the burden of explaining why I should even believe in the first place, let alone its existence, IS on them. You wouldn't just be expected to say "sure! sounds like a great idea!" and not ask for any evidence right? There should be proof because not wanting evidence of something you believe in is ultimately dangerous.

 

[satinbutterfly]

There is no burden of proof in faith and if your faith needs scripture or scientific fact to validate it, then it is not faith. I think everyone including Atheist can agree that there is a driving force in the universe, whether it is energy transference or a omniscient and powerful being, there is still a driving force. So if you find balance and comfort in your life by calling that force "God" and having dogma and ritual surround it great, if you prefer to just think it is the physical nature of things, great. Either way, why would there be any need of burden of proof? It is unprovable and in ultimately just an inner spirituality that gleans your consciousness.

Well said. :clap

 

[333halfabeast]

If a believer in god tells someone that "I believed in a cosmic sky daddy, and you should believe in him", the burden of explaining why I should even believe in the first place, let alone its existence, IS on them. You wouldn't just be expected to say "sure! sounds like a great idea!" and not ask for any evidence right? There should be proof because not wanting evidence of something you believe in is ultimately dangerous.

If I were an atheist (which I am not) I would simply say, "Your beliefs are your own and I am very happy that you find solace in your faith, I prefer to await scientific reasoning and physical proof before committing to it. I respect your beliefs even though we do not share them."

I am a Christian and I do take the stance that, "My God warms my soul, and makes me feel good to know that the force driving the universe is cognizant and has a plan for me and loves me, I feel bad that you among the faithless do not feel that love and live in the emptiness of reason, but I do respect that fact that you still hold my moral values while living in disbelief. I also do not believe every story in the great religious tomes, and I definitely do not believe in organized religion, but I do believe in God and I hope you can respect that."

Well said. :clap

Thank you.

 

[All Else Failed]

If I were an atheist (which I am not) I would simply say, "Your beliefs are your own and I am very happy that you find solace in your faith, I prefer to await scientific reasoning and physical proof before committing to it. I respect your beliefs even though we do not share them."

I am a Christian and I do take the stance that, "My God warms my soul, and makes me feel good to know that the force driving the universe is cognizant and has a plan for me and loves me, I feel bad that you among the faithless do not feel that love and live in the emptiness of reason, but I do respect that fact that you still hold my moral values while living in disbelief. I also do not believe every story in the great religious tomes, and I definitely do not believe in organized religion, but I do believe in God and I hope you can respect that."



Thank you.

I feel bad for you as well. Just accepting something because it makes you feel good is not a good idea. You're taking a feeling, i.e. "I want to think there's something out there", and ascribing a personality to it just because.

 

[333halfabeast]

I feel bad for you as well. Just accepting something because it makes you feel good is not a good idea. You're taking a feeling, i.e. "I want to think there's something out there", and ascribing a personality to it just because.

Why would you feel sorry for me having faith and having that faith make me happy? And really, in life why does everything have to be so black and white and be either simply proven or disproved? Furthermore, I was raised to believe in God and I accepted God and I happy, whether you wish to believe that I am blinding myself because I require no burden of proof or not, does not concern me, just like if you do not believe it does not concern me. I have no authority in your life and I would never try to sway your opinion, and I guarantee no matter how hard you try, you will never sway my opinion. My final point on your statement is that "I" did not ascribe a personality to it. Every great nation since Sumer has had a faith based center of their civilization with a cognizant omniscient being that drove their culture including the one you live in now. So although nothing has ever been proven I am sure we are into the Trillions of people that have had faith (no matter what their religion) have come and gone, how can you be so presumptuous to believe that all of them were wrong?

 

[All Else Failed]

Why would you feel sorry for me having faith and having that faith make me happy? And really, in life why does everything have to be so black and white and be either simply proven or disproved? Furthermore, I was raised to believe in God and I accepted God and I happy, whether you wish to believe that I am blinding myself because I require no burden of proof or not, does not concern me, just like if you do not believe it does not concern me. I have no authority in your life and I would never try to sway your opinion, and I guarantee no matter how hard you try, you will never sway my opinion. My final point on your statement is that "I" did not ascribe a personality to it. Every great nation since Sumer has had a faith based center of their civilization with a cognizant omniscient being that drove their culture including the one you live in now. So although nothing has ever been proven I am sure we are into the Trillions of people that have had faith (no matter what their religion) have come and gone, how can you be so presumptuous to believe that all of them were wrong?

Why would you feel bad for me not having faith in something which there is absolutely no evidence of? I rely ON MYSELF for happiness. Relying on "things" for happiness will only lead to dependence. People do not realize how happy they can make themselves when they do not need material things and others for their own well being and happiness. This is why I like the idea of the "Overman" so much .You're overcoming yourself for yourself and becoming something greater than an average person.


Religion is also not the single driving force in a civilization. Outside forces are, such as neighboring civilizations, trade, weather, and geography. America is based on Enlightenment ideals.


How can you be sop presumptuous that all of these people are right?

 

[333halfabeast]

Why would you feel bad for me not having faith in something which there is absolutely no evidence of? I rely ON MYSELF for happiness. Relying on "things" for happiness will only lead to dependence. People do not realize how happy they can make themselves when they do not need material things and others for their own well being and happiness. This is why I like the idea of the "Overman" so much .You're overcoming yourself for yourself and becoming something greater than an average person.


Religion is also not the single driving force in a civilization. Outside forces are, such as neighboring civilizations, trade, weather, and geography. America is based on Enlightenment ideals.


How can you be sop presumptuous that all of these people are right?

I only feel bad because you don't understand the feeling and spirituality of it all. Like I said, I am glad it makes you happy to live your life the way you do. And how can I be so presumptuous? Because just like your knowledge, my knowledge was gained from the experiences of others and passed to me. In the same way that you quote historical data so do I. Mine, just doesn't have "proof" yet (although I can feel the poof) and sadly Dead people do no talk so, there never will be proof unless the end of days stories are real.

Why do you so adamantly discredit belief and faith? Is there some insecurity driving you to want to remove anything faith and force only your ideals?

And don't bother countering my last question with the actions of organized religion throughout history, I am very aware of the actions of men in power with religion as their leverage to make people act as they shouldn't and I do not subscribe to the organized religion rhetoric so your argument would be moot.

 

[Sylviane88]

I would ask you for reputable scientific journals because you're asking me for scientific proof of things, so I'm asking YOU to back up your claims as well. Not just cite holy texts which are proof of nothing

Who said I claimed anything ??? Simply I put some clear example agreed by science and known by anyone , then I asked some related questions ? do you ask me to prove my questions ???!!!

You're lying, you didn't read my links or you would see how I am right. The immune system started out as a very simple system and got more complex as evolution developed it. Its not that hard to understand. You're studying medicine and they never explained this to you?

Please do not say I'm lying because I really read the content of your provided links ... I'm sorry I didn't find any relationship between your "links" and my question :dunno .. simply, from your link, quote the part that says that the immune system was very simple and has evolved till the today's complex integrated form .. I can't wait to see so :thumbup

I never said that the immune system came from "nothing". Actually, there can never really be "nothing because there are things called "virtual particles" which are always present. So its fallacy to say "well there was nothing so how did life begin out of nothing, atheist!". The truth is, is that matter has always been. Even if you have a "vacuum" in space, there is still matter in it.

I suggest you read up on virtual particles:

Some Frequently Asked Questions About Virtual Particles

Well, let's accept this temporary, How did the immune system evolve from the "virtual particles" ?

No see, you DO believe in the statement that "something cannot come from nothing" because you accuse atheists of believing this.

Because I believe that "something cannot come from nothing" without God (Only one who has the capacity to create something from nothing ).

Did you even read this link I provided?: http://www.stanford.edu/~alinde/1032226.pdf

this is still only a hypothesis, not even a proven theory ... Even the author admitted that at the beginning of the article :thumbup

 

[All Else Failed]

I only feel bad because you don't understand the feeling and spirituality of it all. Like I said, I am glad it makes you happy to live your life the way you do. And how can I be so presumptuous? Because just like your knowledge, my knowledge was gained from the experiences of others and passed to me. In the same way that you quote historical data so do I. Mine, just doesn't have "proof" yet (although I can feel the poof) and sadly Dead people do no talk so, there never will be proof unless the end of days stories are real.

Why do you so adamantly discredit belief and faith? Is there some insecurity driving you to want to remove anything faith and force only your ideals?

And don't bother countering my last question with the actions of organized religion throughout history, I am very aware of the actions of men in power with religion as their leverage to make people act as they shouldn't and I do not subscribe to the organized religion rhetoric so your argument would be moot.

I was religious for most of my life, I know what it feels like to be "spiritual". I know why I felt "spiritual", too. My feelings drove me to blindly believe, and I will never forgive myself for doing that.

I discredit belief because it is ultimately dangerous. Period. If anything, people clinging to ideas like the afterworld is the true insecurity. We exist in there here and the now. I'm not forcing my ideals on anyone.

 

[333halfabeast]

I was religious for most of my life, I know what it feels like to be "spiritual". I know why I felt "spiritual", too. My feelings drove me to blindly believe, and I will never forgive myself for doing that.

I discredit belief because it is ultimately dangerous. Period. If anything, people clinging to ideas like the afterworld is the true insecurity. We exist in there here and the now. I'm not forcing my ideals on anyone.

Well, I hope it makes you happy in your life. I just see you in the religion threads almost on the attack trying to discredit anyone with faith, that is why it seems like you are forcing your ideals. Sorry if I offended you by saying that I felt sorry for you. I just really do love my fellow man, and I know how happy my faith makes me so I wish that same happiness on everyone else. I definitely am not trying to convince you that you should have the same ideals as me, I only ask that you respect the ideals that I do have in the same way that I respect yours.

On the part about the fact that it is "dangerous"... The men who use religion, dogma, tradition and zealous desperate people are dangerous, not faith in a being that requires you to love your fellow man and respect their beliefs and to treat everyone as you wish to be treated. That is the basis of my faith, not the ramblings of some man touting hellfire and brimstone if I do not walk the path that he believes God has for me. I think if more people had my viewpoint on religion and God we could avoid many problems.

 

[All Else Failed]

Well, I hope it makes you happy in your life. I just see you in the religion threads almost on the attack trying to discredit anyone with faith, that is why it seems like you are forcing your ideals. Sorry if I offended you by saying that I felt sorry for you. I just really do love my fellow man, and I know how happy my faith makes me so I wish that same happiness on everyone else. I definitely am not trying to convince you that you should have the same ideals as me, I only ask that you respect the ideals that I do have in the same way that I respect yours.

On the part about the fact that it is "dangerous"... The men who use religion, dogma, tradition and zealous desperate people are dangerous, not faith in a being that requires you to love your fellow man and respect their beliefs and to treat everyone as you wish to be treated. That is the basis of my faith, not the ramblings of some man touting hellfire and brimstone if I do not walk the path that he believes God has for me. I think if more people had my viewpoint on religion and God we could avoid many problems.

Its sort of hard to not be on the attack when people like Sylviane88 post pure babble. I just stopped replying to him because this will get us NOWHERE. Its a waste of time. You didn't offend me, don't worry.

 

[333halfabeast]

Its sort of hard to not be on the attack when people like Sylviane88 post pure babble. I just stopped replying to him because this will get us NOWHERE. Its a waste of time. You didn't offend me, don't worry.

Yeah, I am not a big fan of the people who use the bible or other religious tome as a weapon in debates. Scripture was never meant to be used that way. It is sort of a guideline to being a better person, but really morality comes from upbringing and religion is only a common way to find social morality. I really don't like the way that some people approach their religion and believe that they need to indoctrinate everyone into teh same exact beliefs. Tolerance is key IMO.

 

[Sylviane88]

Its sort of hard to not be on the attack when people like Sylviane88 post pure babble. I just stopped replying to him because this will get us NOWHERE. Its a waste of time. You didn't offend me, don't worry.

As long as you have posted several replies however no reply could answer at least one point of my simple and clear questions above at the beginning of the topic, then you can say you've wasted your time ! Nice try :clap, and good luck next time :thumbup !
PS: between us: no one can answer those clear and logical questions using the views of atheism! I knew it from the beginning, but I gave everyone a chance to post his essays! therefore I've already said: although science can not prove the existence of God directly, it can do so INDIRECTLY .

 

[All Else Failed]

No actually, I answered all of your questions with reputable arguments and links to pages where all of your "questions" are properly answered. You're either not really grasping what they are saying or just willfully remaining ignorant. I understand though, you were raised to be on a one track state of mind, so its a deficiency you'll have to deal with.



You're still contradicting yourself:

You said:

I've already said: although science can not prove the existence of God directly, it can do so INDIRECTLY


So you do not think that science can prove god DIRECTLY, but INDIRECTLY. Well guess what, AT THE END OF THE DAY YOU'RE SAYING SCIENCE CAN PROVE GOD JUST THROUGH DIFFERENT MEANS. Here lies your failure in reasoning. Its sort of predictable though with your type.

 

[The Joker]

As it can't prove something doesn't exist that exist

It's impossible to prove a negative. Full stop.

 

[Sylviane88]

No actually, I answered all of your questions with reputable arguments and links to pages where all of your "questions" are properly answered. You're either not really grasping what they are saying or just willfully remaining ignorant. I understand though, you were raised to be on a one track state of mind, so its a deficiency you'll have to deal with.

Please read my reply N° #30 and post a useful reply ! I was clear and simple in my questions .. try not to be at least off topic ! Please !

You're still contradicting yourself:

You said:

I've already said: although science can not prove the existence of God directly, it can do so INDIRECTLY


So you do not think that science can prove god DIRECTLY, but INDIRECTLY. Well guess what, AT THE END OF THE DAY YOU'RE SAYING SCIENCE CAN PROVE GOD JUST THROUGH DIFFERENT MEANS. Here lies your failure in reasoning. Its sort of predictable though with your type.

Well you failed again to understand what I have meant. Science cannot prove the existence/inexistence of god DIRECTLY because ( as you know ) it is limited to the physical so it can neither prove nor disprove the spiritual .. However if we make a good look of some scientific discoveries (in particular, which are integrated and very complex), we will find that the idea of atheism can never explain the beginning of the functional integration of these things. Therefore, current science as well (although it is limited) can INDIRECTLY lead us to discover the answer of our main question: does the god exist ?

Where is the contradition in all that ???

 

[daniellllleee]

How many atheist bashing threads do we need?

Believe what you like and I'll believe what I like. I've expressed my feelings towards this many times in the "Hey Atheists, why?" thread.

 

[BadBoy@TheWheel]

How many atheist bashing threads do we need?

Believe what you like and I'll believe what I like. I've expressed my feelings towards this many times in the "Hey Atheists, why?" thread.

Well put:clap


This debate is senseless


I'm with Dani