Gods are only a figment of mans imagination. God(s) (all of them) were created by man to explain what was not understood. There is no god or gods, never have been. The old argument "prove god or no god" is a waste of time and since neither case is provable it's a waste of time and effort.
I am so tired of the philosophical arguments for and against an un-provable or provable possibility of something that doesn't exist that I want to puke. We are so inculcated with religion especially Christianity that we don't seem to be able to think outside the box. Even those who find God(s) ridiculous still grant the theists tha the possibility of some sort of supernatural being created the universe and all in it. It's bullshit, there is no such being/thing.
I have no problem with the idea that life is random, just as random as the universe itself. Those of you who feel/think the universe is not random, that is your prerogative, but it doesn't change reality. That the universe may not be random is something we have no indication of, but what caused (a term I have real problems with) it is a question for which we have no answer.
Why is it so important to prove or dis-prove the existence of something that supposedly created reality? What a waste of time, we can argue for centuries without ever reaching a definitive answer that anyone will be able to accept.
The Christian god exists in the same dimension as the Greek, Egyptian or other gods, i.e. some other dimension, but none of them exist. I cannot see why, or any reason that, the Christian God can be any realer than those others. The Christian God is as much myth as any other historical god.
If people want to believe the universe has some meaning, direction, reason for being or what ever; have at it. If it makes you feel better and you need to believe go ahead, but if you think you are a candidate for "heaven" you'd better re-think your beliefs.
If anyone wants me to "prove" my thesis they can go straight to Hell (if you will pardon the expression). Just because I make a categorical statement it doesn't mean it is not correct. I admit I do not like to make categorical statements since they are often faulty; in this case I make an acceptation. You want to argue with me? Go ahead but if you expect me to acquiesce to your demands you can go jump in a lake or preferably an erupting volcano.
Anyone who believes there is a god is terribly terribly misinformed.
End of rant.
Hi Mark, you are welcome to jump in.
I believe there is reasonable scientific and philosophical evidence to support the belief in the existence of God.
I do not believe there is any scientific evidence to support the statement that “A God exists”. If there was you would not need to have Faith. There is also no scientific arguments for the existence of any god.
As for philosophical evidence I can only say the same. There may be philosophical arguments to be made but arguments do not equate to evidence.
If you have evidence, either scientific or philosophical then feel free to demonstrate it to us. I suspect it will only be your subjective opinion rather than objective evidence. If you can offer some I am prepared to reject my atheism.
You might start by giving us a working definition of your god you believe exists that is not self-contradictory. At least then we will be able to understand how the “evidence” supports the definition. Thanking you in advance.
Please do not quote the Bible or Koran as evidence. It is the claim for a God, not the proof of one.
Point taken. Philosophical argument - not evidence. I agree.
They could not be coincidence? There is no way to explain them other than a supernatural one? Are you saying that the Creator of the Universe has decided to take a special interest in your life at the moment?
I'm guessing it's because you're courageous and unselfish.
I know I'm speaking as an atheist, but if God existed, I think that is the kind of behaviour he would want to encourage.
So my previous post leads into this conversation. As I said, I believe there is reasonable scientific and philosophical evidence to support the existence of God. Allow me to expand.
We can use the Cosmological Argument as the starting point, with which many of you are likely to be familiar.
This argument by itself does not prove the existence of God. It does, however, assert that the universe is finite with a definite beginning. So the next question to ask should be ‘What caused the universe?’. Would you believe the Big Bang? There are 5 lines of scientific evidence that proves beyond a reasonable doubt that the universe had a beginning.
1. Second Law of Thermodynamics (or Law of Entropy)
This law states that the universe is running out of usable energy, and that over time, things (universe) naturally fall apart moving from order to disorder. Couple of thoughts here. The First law of Thermodynamics states that the total amount of energy in the universe is constant. Energy is spent, leaving less energy over time to sustain the universe (2nd Law of TD). If the universe is likened to a wound-up clock, then something (or someone) must have wound it up.
2. The universe is expanding.
General Relativity predicted an expanding universe. Edwin Hubble confirmed this. How does this prove a beginning to the universe? If you could record the expansion of the universe on video, then you could play the video in reverse and watch the universe contract back to nothing. That moment when the universe exploded into being from nothing is the moment when time, space, and matter was created. It's important to understand the definition of nothing here - it means "no thing". Zip, zero, nada.
3. Radiation from the Big Bang.
Scientists predicted in 1948 that radiation from the Big Bang would be present if the Big Bang really did occur. In 1965 the cosmic background radiation or afterglow from the Big Bang explosion was discovered by scientists working for Bell Labs.
4. Galaxy Seeds
Following the expanding universe and cosmic radiation afterglow, scientists theorized that there would be slight variations or ripples in the temperatures of the cosmic radiation background. NASA began searching for these ripples in 1989 with the satellite COBE (Cosmic Background Explorer). COBE’s findings were released in 1992. Stephen Hawking called these findings "the most important discovery of the century, if not of all time.” The ripples showed that the explosion and expansion of the universe was precisely tweaked to cause just enough matter to congregate to allow galaxy formation, but not enough to cause the universe to collapse back onto itself
5. Theory of General Relativity
The theory states an absolute beginning of time, space, and matter, and has been mathematically verified to 5 decimal places. Combining General Relativity with points 1 through 4 above, we have strong scientific evidence that the universe has a beginning.
Some concluding thoughts.
None of the scientists referred to here are theists are deists.
With no natural world prior to the Big Bang, natural forces cannot be responsible for the creation of the universe. Something outside of nature must have created the universe.
I am very interested in any feedback you might have. I look forward to your responses.
Why can't you just admit we don't know the answers to these questions and stop pulling the god card as some lame explanation. It is extremely intellectually immature to assume magic when there has never been ONE SINGLE PROVEN supernatural event, EVER !!!
These "logical" apologetic conclusions are a huge waste of time as real science just keep doing what it does- Finding the truest explaination that we are able.