Scientific proof that God exists?

[gejonk03]

I think not only scientific that proof the God exist.
Maybe my question can convince you that God already exist before us.
Who do you think made us as Human?
Who do you think made this galaxies?
galaxies, earth, dinosaur. they are already exist before us, before we found scientific.
That's my opinion. correct me if i wrong. 

Thanks

[1714605506]

1714605506

[Warg]

all scientist are atheists and there are no scientific proof of god. To the contrary there're logical proof that god is fiction

[Buffer Overflow]

ask him why he is such an evil bastard

He isn't. You are simply mistaking the devil for God. And that is the thing the devil wants you to do.

There's only one thing more evil than the devil..... it's infinitely more evil creator.

No, the thing that is more evil than the devil is a creature that bites the hand of its Creator while being fed by Him.

Of course I forgot, if you accepted the truth, then you'd be forced to admit your guilt of worshipping evil.  It's in your best interests to disagree with me.

If I happen to worship evil a little, the sacrifice of Jesus has covered me so that my guilt is taken away as though it had not been. Why? Because I accept and believe in the sacrifice of Jesus for me. But your guilt and sin remain with you. Why? Because you won't even accept the existence of God, to say nothing about the sacrifice of Jesus, His Son. You are in deep dodo, buddy. Change while you still have time.

Nice get-outta jail free card you've awarded yourself. So you can now do what the hell you like and it doesn't matter.
A great amount of the worlds problems are caused by this sort of poisionous thinking.

Where your thinking (or should I say, others doing the thinking for you) implodes of course, is all this nonsense is based on the assumption that your god is good and will keep his word. But as we just discovered, your god isn't good, but evil. So because your god is evil, he won't think nothing of going back on his word, or screwing you over, because he's evil. In a nutshell, your god is completely untrustworthy, even though you'll keep pretending to yourself he is.

It wasn't God's idea that anybody go to jail. The jail of Hell isn't a jail that anyone can get out of on his own. So, God took matters into His own hands, and sent His Son Jesus to get us all out of jail.

If you won't accept Jesus salvation for yourself, it is you who is evil. You are even worse when you cause others to reject Jesus salvation.

Just listen to yourself. You are saying that billions of people in the world are evil because they don't believe in the Christian mythology of Jesus salvation.

Think you need to sit in a quiet room and have a chat with yourself where you went so wrong in life.

[Mi5h0]

all scientist are atheists and there are no scientific proof of god. To the contrary there're logical proof that god is fiction

Not quite. According to this Pew Research poll (Scientists and Belief), 51% believe in either a God or some kind of "universal spirit or higher power".

If we take out the "universal spirit or higher power" believers, then atheist scientists outnumber theist scientists, 41% to 33%.
17% of scientists describe themselves as atheist, 11% as agnostic, and 20% as "nothing in particular."

In the general public, 95% believes in either a God or some kind of "universal spirit or higher power", only 2% are self-labelled atheists, 2% agnostic, and 12% nothing in particular.

[BADecker]

ask him why he is such an evil bastard

He isn't. You are simply mistaking the devil for God. And that is the thing the devil wants you to do.

There's only one thing more evil than the devil..... it's infinitely more evil creator.

No, the thing that is more evil than the devil is a creature that bites the hand of its Creator while being fed by Him.

Of course I forgot, if you accepted the truth, then you'd be forced to admit your guilt of worshipping evil.  It's in your best interests to disagree with me.

If I happen to worship evil a little, the sacrifice of Jesus has covered me so that my guilt is taken away as though it had not been. Why? Because I accept and believe in the sacrifice of Jesus for me. But your guilt and sin remain with you. Why? Because you won't even accept the existence of God, to say nothing about the sacrifice of Jesus, His Son. You are in deep dodo, buddy. Change while you still have time.

Nice get-outta jail free card you've awarded yourself. So you can now do what the hell you like and it doesn't matter.
A great amount of the worlds problems are caused by this sort of poisionous thinking.

Where your thinking (or should I say, others doing the thinking for you) implodes of course, is all this nonsense is based on the assumption that your god is good and will keep his word. But as we just discovered, your god isn't good, but evil. So because your god is evil, he won't think nothing of going back on his word, or screwing you over, because he's evil. In a nutshell, your god is completely untrustworthy, even though you'll keep pretending to yourself he is.

It wasn't God's idea that anybody go to jail. The jail of Hell isn't a jail that anyone can get out of on his own. So, God took matters into His own hands, and sent His Son Jesus to get us all out of jail.

If you won't accept Jesus salvation for yourself, it is you who is evil. You are even worse when you cause others to reject Jesus salvation.

Just listen to yourself. You are saying that billions of people in the world are evil because they don't believe in the Christian mythology of Jesus salvation.

Think you need to sit in a quiet room and have a chat with yourself where you went so wrong in life.

Do you always have to prove that you are so unthinking? All people are evil because they simply are evil. The result of being evil is death. Jesus salvation is an offer from God to bypass death. You are going to lose your salvation if you don't change your thinking and accept the Jesus offer.

[BartS]

Personally I think those trying to obtain scientific proof of the existence of god are approaching this from the wrong perspective, you believe in god proof or not proof.

[BADecker]

Personally I think those trying to obtain scientific proof of the existence of god are approaching this from the wrong perspective, you believe in god proof or not proof.

What does a person mean when he says he believes or doesn't believe in God?

What I mean is, can a person believe in something that he doesn't have any evidence for, at all?

For example, what would it mean to believe in the planet Mars? Does it mean that you believe Mars exists? Does it mean you believe in the promise of colonization? Does it mean that if Mars talked to you, you would believe what it said?

Make the distinction about believing in God. Believe that He doesn't exist, and ignore the rest about Him. Or...
Believe that He exists without knowing it. Or...
Know that He exists, and then believe the unproven things about Him. Or...
Know that He exists and believe what He tells you in the Bible.

Actually, you can clarify this even further if you want. But simply saying that you believe in God, or that you don't believe in God, says very little about what you believe or don't believe.

[BuyWithBitcoin.info]

God was an myth of people who can't take everything in their hands.
They need something to believe in, you would rather pray to be successful or do something to achieve it?
Believe in yourself and you will find a god within.

[QuestionAuthority]

Personally I think those trying to obtain scientific proof of the existence of god are approaching this from the wrong perspective, you believe in god proof or not proof.

What does a person mean when he says he believes or doesn't believe in God?

What I mean is, can a person believe in something that he doesn't have any evidence for, at all?

For example, what would it mean to believe in the planet Mars? Does it mean that you believe Mars exists? Does it mean you believe in the promise of colonization? Does it mean that if Mars talked to you, you would believe what it said?

Make the distinction about believing in God. Believe that He doesn't exist, and ignore the rest about Him. Or...
Believe that He exists without knowing it. Or...
Know that He exists, and then believe the unproven things about Him. Or...
Know that He exists and believe what He tells you in the Bible.

Actually, you can clarify this even further if you want. But simply saying that you believe in God, or that you don't believe in God, says very little about what you believe or don't believe.

I'm God BADecker. I'm writing it down now so you can see it in print. You don't have to believe in second hand stories written down by third parties and handed down over two thousand years. This is first hand proof straight from the mouth of God. I will answer your prayers as well and as quickly as they have ever been answered.

If you refuse to believe that I'm God then I will condem you to an eternity of agony in burning hell fire when you die. Prove that I'm not God!

[Buffer Overflow]

Personally I think those trying to obtain scientific proof of the existence of god are approaching this from the wrong perspective, you believe in god proof or not proof.

+1

Spot on. It's called faith, a belief that is not based on proof.
Science can never proof God, not now and never will, because science can only use empirical data.

Anybody claiming or trying to obtain scientfic proof of God is:

1) Lying or plain ignorant of science.
2) Too much spare time on their hands.
3) Having some sort of faith breakdown. Ask yourself, why would somebody of faith need (or even seek) scientfic proof of God? Surely that's the whole point of faith? Seems to me, if someone does, they are in the middle of some sort of God faith crisis in their life. Pretending they have scientfic proof of God, is just a cry for help.

[BADecker]

Personally I think those trying to obtain scientific proof of the existence of god are approaching this from the wrong perspective, you believe in god proof or not proof.

+1

Spot on. It's called faith, a belief that is not based on proof.
Science can never proof God, not now and never will, because science can only use empirical data.

Anybody claiming or trying to obtain scientfic proof of God is:

1) Lying or plain ignorant of science.
2) Too much spare time on their hands.
3) Having some sort of faith breakdown. Ask yourself, why would somebody of faith need (or even seek) scientfic proof of God? Surely that's the whole point of faith? Seems to me, if someone does, they are in the middle of some sort of God faith crisis in their life. Pretending they have scientfic proof of God, is just a cry for help.

3) Because blind faith is never strong. It might be vocal, but it is not strong.

Faith in God is faith in what He says. If you want to simply believe that He exists, your faith is rather blind. Get to KNOW that He exists, so you have opportunity to listen to what He says. Then you can believe in Him or not.

[TooQik]

Personally I think those trying to obtain scientific proof of the existence of god are approaching this from the wrong perspective, you believe in god proof or not proof.

+1

Spot on. It's called faith, a belief that is not based on proof.
Science can never proof God, not now and never will, because science can only use empirical data.

Anybody claiming or trying to obtain scientfic proof of God is:

1) Lying or plain ignorant of science.
2) Too much spare time on their hands.
3) Having some sort of faith breakdown. Ask yourself, why would somebody of faith need (or even seek) scientfic proof of God? Surely that's the whole point of faith? Seems to me, if someone does, they are in the middle of some sort of God faith crisis in their life. Pretending they have scientfic proof of God, is just a cry for help.

3) Because blind faith is never strong. It might be vocal, but it is not strong.

Faith in God is faith in what He says. If you want to simply believe that He exists, your faith is rather blind. Get to KNOW that He exists, so you have opportunity to listen to what He says. Then you can believe in Him or not.

But all religion is the definition of blind faith. People choose to believe stories in a book written years ago without ever seeing anything first hand.

[Buffer Overflow]

Personally I think those trying to obtain scientific proof of the existence of god are approaching this from the wrong perspective, you believe in god proof or not proof.

+1

Spot on. It's called faith, a belief that is not based on proof.
Science can never proof God, not now and never will, because science can only use empirical data.

Anybody claiming or trying to obtain scientfic proof of God is:

1) Lying or plain ignorant of science.
2) Too much spare time on their hands.
3) Having some sort of faith breakdown. Ask yourself, why would somebody of faith need (or even seek) scientfic proof of God? Surely that's the whole point of faith? Seems to me, if someone does, they are in the middle of some sort of God faith crisis in their life. Pretending they have scientfic proof of God, is just a cry for help.

3) Because blind faith is never strong. It might be vocal, but it is not strong.

Faith in God is faith in what He says. If you want to simply believe that He exists, your faith is rather blind. Get to KNOW that He exists, so you have opportunity to listen to what He says. Then you can believe in Him or not.

But all religion is the definition of blind faith. People choose to believe stories in a book written years ago without ever seeing anything first hand.

Claiming the bible (or any other claimed holy book for that matter) is the "word of God" is a circular argument based on 100% blind faith.

In order to know if the bible is the "word of God", you would first need to check it against the "word of God" to make sure. (Assuming there is such a thing anyway.)
Of course once someone claims something is the "word of God", then anything could be the "word of God". Am I speaking the "word of God"? Seems to me people just pick and choose what is the "word of God" is to suit themselves.

Some dishonest people claim the bible must be the "word of God" because it's actual existance is impossible, so it's a miracle. Well what does that mean? Obviously it does exist, so it's not impossible.
Now, once you open up the notion of miracles existing, then you have to accept that other miracles can happen, so then impossible things aren't impossible anymore.

But, guess what.....

They then claim that evolution is impossible, and go all funny when you say "well it must be a miracle".

Blind faith is foolish faith.

 

[stats]

Personally I think those trying to obtain scientific proof of the existence of god are approaching this from the wrong perspective, you believe in god proof or not proof.

+1

Spot on. It's called faith, a belief that is not based on proof.
Science can never proof God, not now and never will, because science can only use empirical data.

Anybody claiming or trying to obtain scientfic proof of God is:

1) Lying or plain ignorant of science.
2) Too much spare time on their hands.
3) Having some sort of faith breakdown. Ask yourself, why would somebody of faith need (or even seek) scientfic proof of God? Surely that's the whole point of faith? Seems to me, if someone does, they are in the middle of some sort of God faith crisis in their life. Pretending they have scientfic proof of God, is just a cry for help.

3) Because blind faith is never strong. It might be vocal, but it is not strong.

Faith in God is faith in what He says. If you want to simply believe that He exists, your faith is rather blind. Get to KNOW that He exists, so you have opportunity to listen to what He says. Then you can believe in Him or not.

But all religion is the definition of blind faith. People choose to believe stories in a book written years ago without ever seeing anything first hand.

Claiming the bible (or any other claimed holy book for that matter) is the "word of God" is a circular argument based on 100% blind faith.

In order to know if the bible is the "word of God", you would first need to check it against the "word of God" to make sure. (Assuming there is such a thing anyway.)
Of course once someone claims something is the "word of God", then anything could be the "word of God". Am I speaking the "word of God"? Seems to me people just pick and choose what is the "word of God" is to suit themselves.

Some dishonest people claim the bible must be the "word of God" because it's actual existance is impossible, so it's a miracle. Well what does that mean? Obviously it does exist, so it's not impossible.
Now, once you open up the notion of miracles existing, then you have to accept that other miracles can happen, so then impossible things aren't impossible anymore.

But, guess what.....

They then claim that evolution is impossible, and go all funny when you say "well it must be a miracle".

Blind faith is foolish faith.

 

Very nicely put!

[BADecker]

Personally I think those trying to obtain scientific proof of the existence of god are approaching this from the wrong perspective, you believe in god proof or not proof.

+1

Spot on. It's called faith, a belief that is not based on proof.
Science can never proof God, not now and never will, because science can only use empirical data.

Anybody claiming or trying to obtain scientfic proof of God is:

1) Lying or plain ignorant of science.
2) Too much spare time on their hands.
3) Having some sort of faith breakdown. Ask yourself, why would somebody of faith need (or even seek) scientfic proof of God? Surely that's the whole point of faith? Seems to me, if someone does, they are in the middle of some sort of God faith crisis in their life. Pretending they have scientfic proof of God, is just a cry for help.

3) Because blind faith is never strong. It might be vocal, but it is not strong.

Faith in God is faith in what He says. If you want to simply believe that He exists, your faith is rather blind. Get to KNOW that He exists, so you have opportunity to listen to what He says. Then you can believe in Him or not.

But all religion is the definition of blind faith. People choose to believe stories in a book written years ago without ever seeing anything first hand.

Wrong. First there is the evidence and proof that God exists:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg10718395#msg10718395
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1355109.msg14047133#msg14047133
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1662153.40
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1054513.msg16803380#msg16803380.

Then there is the proof of the strength of God, the Bible, through the history of its being written and compiled, the strengths (and weaknesses) of the nation (Israel) that did it, and the fact of the Bible prophesies that have been and are being fulfilled.

If this is blind faith, forget about weak blind faith things like big bang theory, black hole theory, and relativity theory.

[TooQik]

Personally I think those trying to obtain scientific proof of the existence of god are approaching this from the wrong perspective, you believe in god proof or not proof.

+1

Spot on. It's called faith, a belief that is not based on proof.
Science can never proof God, not now and never will, because science can only use empirical data.

Anybody claiming or trying to obtain scientfic proof of God is:

1) Lying or plain ignorant of science.
2) Too much spare time on their hands.
3) Having some sort of faith breakdown. Ask yourself, why would somebody of faith need (or even seek) scientfic proof of God? Surely that's the whole point of faith? Seems to me, if someone does, they are in the middle of some sort of God faith crisis in their life. Pretending they have scientfic proof of God, is just a cry for help.

3) Because blind faith is never strong. It might be vocal, but it is not strong.

Faith in God is faith in what He says. If you want to simply believe that He exists, your faith is rather blind. Get to KNOW that He exists, so you have opportunity to listen to what He says. Then you can believe in Him or not.

But all religion is the definition of blind faith. People choose to believe stories in a book written years ago without ever seeing anything first hand.

Claiming the bible (or any other claimed holy book for that matter) is the "word of God" is a circular argument based on 100% blind faith.

In order to know if the bible is the "word of God", you would first need to check it against the "word of God" to make sure. (Assuming there is such a thing anyway.)
Of course once someone claims something is the "word of God", then anything could be the "word of God". Am I speaking the "word of God"? Seems to me people just pick and choose what is the "word of God" is to suit themselves.

Some dishonest people claim the bible must be the "word of God" because it's actual existance is impossible, so it's a miracle. Well what does that mean? Obviously it does exist, so it's not impossible.
Now, once you open up the notion of miracles existing, then you have to accept that other miracles can happen, so then impossible things aren't impossible anymore.

But, guess what.....

They then claim that evolution is impossible, and go all funny when you say "well it must be a miracle".

Blind faith is foolish faith.

 

Very nicely put!

My sentiment also.

[TooQik]

Personally I think those trying to obtain scientific proof of the existence of god are approaching this from the wrong perspective, you believe in god proof or not proof.

+1

Spot on. It's called faith, a belief that is not based on proof.
Science can never proof God, not now and never will, because science can only use empirical data.

Anybody claiming or trying to obtain scientfic proof of God is:

1) Lying or plain ignorant of science.
2) Too much spare time on their hands.
3) Having some sort of faith breakdown. Ask yourself, why would somebody of faith need (or even seek) scientfic proof of God? Surely that's the whole point of faith? Seems to me, if someone does, they are in the middle of some sort of God faith crisis in their life. Pretending they have scientfic proof of God, is just a cry for help.

3) Because blind faith is never strong. It might be vocal, but it is not strong.

Faith in God is faith in what He says. If you want to simply believe that He exists, your faith is rather blind. Get to KNOW that He exists, so you have opportunity to listen to what He says. Then you can believe in Him or not.

But all religion is the definition of blind faith. People choose to believe stories in a book written years ago without ever seeing anything first hand.

Wrong. First there is the evidence and proof that God exists:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg10718395#msg10718395
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1355109.msg14047133#msg14047133
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1662153.40
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1054513.msg16803380#msg16803380.

Then there is the proof of the strength of God, the Bible, through the history of its being written and compiled, the strengths (and weaknesses) of the nation (Israel) that did it, and the fact of the Bible prophesies that have been and are being fulfilled.

If this is blind faith, forget about weak blind faith things like big bang theory, black hole theory, and relativity theory.

Simply stating that something is wrong and then pointing to your own posts on other threads does not make you correct, as others on this forum have pointed out a number of times to you.

You only need to look four posts above to Buffer Overflows comments to see how flawed your argument is.

[BADecker]

Personally I think those trying to obtain scientific proof of the existence of god are approaching this from the wrong perspective, you believe in god proof or not proof.

+1

Spot on. It's called faith, a belief that is not based on proof.
Science can never proof God, not now and never will, because science can only use empirical data.

Anybody claiming or trying to obtain scientfic proof of God is:

1) Lying or plain ignorant of science.
2) Too much spare time on their hands.
3) Having some sort of faith breakdown. Ask yourself, why would somebody of faith need (or even seek) scientfic proof of God? Surely that's the whole point of faith? Seems to me, if someone does, they are in the middle of some sort of God faith crisis in their life. Pretending they have scientfic proof of God, is just a cry for help.

3) Because blind faith is never strong. It might be vocal, but it is not strong.

Faith in God is faith in what He says. If you want to simply believe that He exists, your faith is rather blind. Get to KNOW that He exists, so you have opportunity to listen to what He says. Then you can believe in Him or not.

But all religion is the definition of blind faith. People choose to believe stories in a book written years ago without ever seeing anything first hand.

Wrong. First there is the evidence and proof that God exists:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg10718395#msg10718395
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1355109.msg14047133#msg14047133
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1662153.40
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1054513.msg16803380#msg16803380.

Then there is the proof of the strength of God, the Bible, through the history of its being written and compiled, the strengths (and weaknesses) of the nation (Israel) that did it, and the fact of the Bible prophesies that have been and are being fulfilled.

If this is blind faith, forget about weak blind faith things like big bang theory, black hole theory, and relativity theory.

Simply stating that something is wrong and then pointing to your own posts on other threads does not make you correct, as others on this forum have pointed out a number of times to you.

You only need to look four posts above to Buffer Overflows comments to see how flawed your argument is.

It doesn't matter to me what you believe. My posts are there for you to research what I have said... IF YOU SO DESIRE. If you don't accept the facts I point out, that's your business.

[TooQik]

Personally I think those trying to obtain scientific proof of the existence of god are approaching this from the wrong perspective, you believe in god proof or not proof.

+1

Spot on. It's called faith, a belief that is not based on proof.
Science can never proof God, not now and never will, because science can only use empirical data.

Anybody claiming or trying to obtain scientfic proof of God is:

1) Lying or plain ignorant of science.
2) Too much spare time on their hands.
3) Having some sort of faith breakdown. Ask yourself, why would somebody of faith need (or even seek) scientfic proof of God? Surely that's the whole point of faith? Seems to me, if someone does, they are in the middle of some sort of God faith crisis in their life. Pretending they have scientfic proof of God, is just a cry for help.

3) Because blind faith is never strong. It might be vocal, but it is not strong.

Faith in God is faith in what He says. If you want to simply believe that He exists, your faith is rather blind. Get to KNOW that He exists, so you have opportunity to listen to what He says. Then you can believe in Him or not.

But all religion is the definition of blind faith. People choose to believe stories in a book written years ago without ever seeing anything first hand.

Wrong. First there is the evidence and proof that God exists:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg10718395#msg10718395
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1355109.msg14047133#msg14047133
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1662153.40
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1054513.msg16803380#msg16803380.

Then there is the proof of the strength of God, the Bible, through the history of its being written and compiled, the strengths (and weaknesses) of the nation (Israel) that did it, and the fact of the Bible prophesies that have been and are being fulfilled.

If this is blind faith, forget about weak blind faith things like big bang theory, black hole theory, and relativity theory.

Simply stating that something is wrong and then pointing to your own posts on other threads does not make you correct, as others on this forum have pointed out a number of times to you.

You only need to look four posts above to Buffer Overflows comments to see how flawed your argument is.

It doesn't matter to me what you believe. My posts are there for you to research what I have said... IF YOU SO DESIRE. If you don't accept the facts I point out, that's your business.

No, it quite clearly matters to you what others believe, as you push your religious agenda on everyone not of your faith at every opportunity you get on this forum.

[stats]

Wrong. First there is the evidence and proof that God exists:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg10718395#msg10718395
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1355109.msg14047133#msg14047133
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1662153.40
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1054513.msg16803380#msg16803380.

Then there is the proof of the strength of God, the Bible, through the history of its being written and compiled, the strengths (and weaknesses) of the nation (Israel) that did it, and the fact of the Bible prophesies that have been and are being fulfilled.

If this is blind faith, forget about weak blind faith things like big bang theory, black hole theory, and relativity theory.

And there you go again, using your own words as proof.

Chuckles you really should try something new.

Your words do not make something true. You use assumptions to "justify" what you believe.