Scientific proof that God exists?

[BADecker]

Funny because we already explained you all the fallacies you are saying yet you still dont want to acknowledge it.

I don't acknowledge that God doesn't exist, because the evidence that shows that He exists is so overwhelming, and way beyond the evidence that suggests that He doesn't, that it would be foolish to even think that He might not exist.

[1713864525]

1713864525

[1713864525]

1713864525

[1713864525]

1713864525

[1713864525]

1713864525

[BADecker]

I am a Muslim, The day I get convinced of a scientific proof that god exists is the day I become an atheist. The leap of faith is why god "in ibrahimic religions based belief systems" promised so much. People seeking "scientific proof" that god exists are just as stupid as the ones giving out proofs that god does not exist. In my humble opinion.

Would you believe that God exists if there weren't any religions, and no religious writings, and no knowledge of the heavens and the earth, and no religious people? Maybe, but probably not. All faith exists because of some evidence of some kind.

Pure blind faith in something is simply foolish, and really doesn't happen. Even atheists suggest that there is no God because they think that there is evidence in that direction. Because they can't come close to proving that there is no God, and because there are loads of things that show that God exists - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg10718395#msg10718395 - atheists are involved in a religion, and most of them don't even realize it.

[cryptodevil]

the evidence at https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg10718395#msg10718395 is, the evidence at the link is proof that God exists, but the evidence that suggests that God doesn't exist can't hold a candle to the evidence that He does.

That link is simply evidence of you employing logical fallacies and intellectual dishonesty repeatedly.

[BADecker]

the evidence at https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg10718395#msg10718395 is, the evidence at the link is proof that God exists, but the evidence that suggests that God doesn't exist can't hold a candle to the evidence that He does.

That link is simply evidence of you employing logical fallacies and intellectual dishonesty repeatedly.

I accept the idea that you have brainwashed yourself into thinking what ever you think about the info in the link. Anybody who can think, who reads through it can see the strong evidence showing that God exists. It is common knowledge brought out into the open. That's all.

[XinXan]

the evidence at https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg10718395#msg10718395 is, the evidence at the link is proof that God exists, but the evidence that suggests that God doesn't exist can't hold a candle to the evidence that He does.

That link is simply evidence of you employing logical fallacies and intellectual dishonesty repeatedly.

I accept the idea that you have brainwashed yourself into thinking what ever you think about the info in the link. Anybody who can think, who reads through it can see the strong evidence showing that God exists. It is common knowledge brought out into the open. That's all.

So far seems like everybody knows those are fallacies and the only brainwashed person here is you. Im sorry to tell you but you are brainwashed.

[Buffer Overflow]

Funny because we already explained you all the fallacies you are saying yet you still dont want to acknowledge it.

I don't acknowledge that God doesn't exist, because the evidence that shows that He exists is so overwhelming, and way beyond the evidence that suggests that He doesn't, that it would be foolish to even think that He might not exist.

Not really. What would be foolish is listening to some clown claiming proof for something that is impossible to prove using science.

[the joint]

Why do you keep on resisting the knowledge that God exists when it has been proven to you, when you can prove it to yourself?

If you have proof of god then you have lost your faith in god. You cannot have proof and faith at the same time.
Why are you insisting people lose their faith in existence of god?

As I explained to you the last time you said this, faith doesn't have to be blind faith.

For example, if you hold up your closed hand and say, "I have a folded up $5 dollar bill in my closed hand," some people have faith that you are telling the truth. Others think that you are lying.

Those who have faith that you are holding a $5, can see your hand and you for a fact. So, they can have faith that the $5 might be there, 'cause they don't know you very well. Others who know you better, can see that you are there, and that you are holding up your hand (facts), but because they know you, they know that there is great probability that you are lying. Thus they have faith that there is NOT a $5 in your hand.

Wake up and see that God really DOES exist so that you can go the next step and see the good that He is all about... FOR YOU.

What next step? There is no next step.

Besides the above, you can't read very well, can you. Too much meth, right? Destroyed your abilities to think straight, right?

 

Well thanks for pointing out that having faith in something doesnt mean it exists. You are making arguments against yourself now.

The only argument that I am making is the one that I am not making any arguments except the argument that I am not making any arguments.

You want proof for the existence of God? Read the stuff at this link https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg10718395#msg10718395.

Already proven that everything there is just a bunch of fallacies, hell even when you tried to defend yourself you did it with another fallacy.

No. The only thing proven is that you can SAY a bunch of stuff about things being not proven.

Nope i actually even gave you the definitions and the wikipedia page, i dont know what else do you want

Its like someone insulted someone else, i tell him he is insulting, he says he is not, i give him the definiton of an insult and he keeps saying he is not insulting, thats pretty much you right now.

Now you are getting really far out. Anybody can write things into Wikipedia. And you want to call that proof? The things that I express at https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg10718395#msg10718395 are self-evident evidences that prove the existence of God. All you need do is think them out.

"Self-evident evidences" is a contradiction.  The definition of "self-evident" means that no evidence is needed to know it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-evidence

In epistemology (theory of knowledge), a self-evident proposition is one that is known to be true by understanding its meaning without proof.

The exception is that you can find many people who have so trained them against the evidence, that even if it is self-evident to most, it still won't be evident to them. It's called brainwashing, and they do it to themselves. As you can see from this thread, many atheists are among those who have so alienated themselves against what is self-evident, that it is necessary to call it evidence just to show them that it is something they can calculate their way through.

No, there is no exception.  If a belief is based upon external evidence, then it is not self-evident.

Example:  It is self-evident that a bible is evidence of a bible.  It is not self-evident that a bible is evidence that God exists.

Example 2:  It is self-evident that complexity is complex.  It is not self-evident that complexity means something created it.

[BADecker]

the evidence at https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg10718395#msg10718395 is, the evidence at the link is proof that God exists, but the evidence that suggests that God doesn't exist can't hold a candle to the evidence that He does.

That link is simply evidence of you employing logical fallacies and intellectual dishonesty repeatedly.

I accept the idea that you have brainwashed yourself into thinking what ever you think about the info in the link. Anybody who can think, who reads through it can see the strong evidence showing that God exists. It is common knowledge brought out into the open. That's all.

So far seems like everybody knows those are fallacies and the only brainwashed person here is you. Im sorry to tell you but you are brainwashed.

Actually, it's a small group of atheists who don't know that God exists. Well, they are welcome to their religion.

[BADecker]

Funny because we already explained you all the fallacies you are saying yet you still dont want to acknowledge it.

I don't acknowledge that God doesn't exist, because the evidence that shows that He exists is so overwhelming, and way beyond the evidence that suggests that He doesn't, that it would be foolish to even think that He might not exist.

Not really. What would be foolish is listening to some clown claiming proof for something that is impossible to prove using science.

That just goes to show you how backward science is. Most people can't even see how science proves God when it stares them right in the face, and some even if it were to jump up and bite them in the left eye.

 

[cryptodevil]

Actually, it's a small group of atheists who don't know that God exists. Well, they are welcome to their religion.

http://www.jesusandmo.net/2009/11/06/beset/

[cryptodevil]

http://www.jesusandmo.net/2009/11/17/bile/

[BADecker]

No, there is no exception.  If a belief is based upon external evidence, then it is not self-evident.

Example:  It is self-evident that a bible is evidence of a bible.  It is not self-evident that a bible is evidence that God exists.

Example 2:  It is self-evident that complexity is complex.  It is not self-evident that complexity means something created it.

Simply that I acknowledge that you believe something, doesn't necessarily mean I am acknowledging what you believe.

[XinXan]

the evidence at https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg10718395#msg10718395 is, the evidence at the link is proof that God exists, but the evidence that suggests that God doesn't exist can't hold a candle to the evidence that He does.

That link is simply evidence of you employing logical fallacies and intellectual dishonesty repeatedly.

I accept the idea that you have brainwashed yourself into thinking what ever you think about the info in the link. Anybody who can think, who reads through it can see the strong evidence showing that God exists. It is common knowledge brought out into the open. That's all.

So far seems like everybody knows those are fallacies and the only brainwashed person here is you. Im sorry to tell you but you are brainwashed.

Actually, it's a small group of atheists who don't know that God exists. Well, they are welcome to their religion.

Nope, im talking about here in the forum, everyone and i mean literally everyone who has read your ''proof'' said its stupid, even religious people xD...

[Buffer Overflow]

No, there is no exception.  If a belief is based upon external evidence, then it is not self-evident.

Example:  It is self-evident that a bible is evidence of a bible.  It is not self-evident that a bible is evidence that God exists.

Example 2:  It is self-evident that complexity is complex.  It is not self-evident that complexity means something created it.

Simply that I acknowledge that you believe something, doesn't necessarily mean I am acknowledging what you believe.

Well that's the standard definition.
Why not just admit your wrong and save yourself from further embarrassment?

[BADecker]

the evidence at https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg10718395#msg10718395 is, the evidence at the link is proof that God exists, but the evidence that suggests that God doesn't exist can't hold a candle to the evidence that He does.

That link is simply evidence of you employing logical fallacies and intellectual dishonesty repeatedly.

I accept the idea that you have brainwashed yourself into thinking what ever you think about the info in the link. Anybody who can think, who reads through it can see the strong evidence showing that God exists. It is common knowledge brought out into the open. That's all.

So far seems like everybody knows those are fallacies and the only brainwashed person here is you. Im sorry to tell you but you are brainwashed.

Actually, it's a small group of atheists who don't know that God exists. Well, they are welcome to their religion.

Nope, im talking about here in the forum, everyone and i mean literally everyone who has read your ''proof'' said its stupid, even religious people xD...

I would believe that they are few. How many forum members are there? Even if there were thousands, they are few compared with people who believe that God exists, and would understand how He can be proven by the things that I have said at the link https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg10718395#msg10718395 if they took the time to think them through.

These are not the only points that prove God. One of the very strong points in addition to these that I have not mentioned often is the point of mathematical probability. The fact that mathematical probability shows that a built-up universe such as ours is impossible, especially in the light of the existence of life on earth and all the things associated with life, reveals that God MUST exist, Whatever or Whomever He might be.

When you throw in the the standard entropy we see all around us, along with the fact that try as they might, scientists are not able to start life up from inanimate materials, Whatever God is, He is Supremely Great.

[BADecker]

No, there is no exception.  If a belief is based upon external evidence, then it is not self-evident.

Example:  It is self-evident that a bible is evidence of a bible.  It is not self-evident that a bible is evidence that God exists.

Example 2:  It is self-evident that complexity is complex.  It is not self-evident that complexity means something created it.

Simply that I acknowledge that you believe something, doesn't necessarily mean I am acknowledging what you believe.

Well that's the standard definition.
Why not just admit your wrong and save yourself from further embarrassment?

When I am right, as I am, there is no embarrassment. When you have been laughed at as long as you have been, you can't feel the embarrassment, can you?

[the joint]

No, there is no exception.  If a belief is based upon external evidence, then it is not self-evident.

Example:  It is self-evident that a bible is evidence of a bible.  It is not self-evident that a bible is evidence that God exists.

Example 2:  It is self-evident that complexity is complex.  It is not self-evident that complexity means something created it.

Simply that I acknowledge that you believe something, doesn't necessarily mean I am acknowledging what you believe.

That you claim to have proof or evidence of God's existence doesn't mean your claim is true.  

And the fact you think logical fallacies are fallacious themselves just means you've assumed an eternally losing position.  

If logical fallacies didn't exist, it would be impossible to make a false/fallacious claim.

[cryptodevil]

The fact that mathematical probability shows that a built-up universe such as ours is impossible,

We're here aren't we? Ergo, not impossible.

[BADecker]

The fact that mathematical probability shows that a built-up universe such as ours is impossible,

We're here aren't we? Ergo, not impossible.

Why should I even post this? That is exactly what I said, and it is in my post, which part you didn't quote above. In fact, the fact that we are here is the ONLY logic that we have for the possibility that we can exist. Except for our existence, it is impossible that we or the universe does exist according to any knowledge or understanding that we have.

Someday we might gain enough knowledge that we will be able to say truthfully that we understand how we are possible. But we aren't there yet by a long shot.

This makes the idea of the existence of God more probable... God Who is way more "advanced" than we... God Who made us and all things with understanding and knowledge that we don't have. How does He have knowledge that we don't? It is in the definition of the word "God."

[the joint]

The fact that mathematical probability shows that a built-up universe such as ours is impossible,

We're here aren't we? Ergo, not impossible.

Mathematics demonstrates that a "built-up" universe such as ours is necessary.  The mathematical proof for the boundary of a boundary = 0 shows us that mathematical systems, such as the Universe, are internally self-contained and are systemically closed.  This mathematical closure implies that Universe is internally self-consistent and self-determinate.  Thus, whatever a system is, it must necessarily be.  Because the Universe is "built up," it is axiomatic that it must necessarily be "built up" to, well...be.