Scientific proof that God exists?

[kinilawnabakulaw]

The mere fact that our complex bodily functions are working is proof enough of God's great design.

[promosn]

bible exists and is the will of god, q.e.d.

[BADecker]

bible exists and is the will of god, q.e.d.

The scientific proof for the impossibility of the Bible, is more of the proof that God exists. What I mean is, when you look at the things that are written in the Bible, and the time periods that the things were written in, you can see that there is no way that people could have written with such "connectedness." So, the Bible is impossible, except that it exists. This shows that the guiding hand behind it is God.

[BADecker]

There wasn't any scientific proof for anything, until somebody developed the idea of scientific proof. Since then there is scientific proof for some things, but no scientific proof for many other things.

Just because somebody hasn't seen the scientific proof doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Just saying that there isn't any scientific proof for God doesn't make it so, unless you can prove it. In the face of the scientific proof that has been shown:
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 ;
the proof has to be scientifically rebutted with real science. If it isn't, the proof stands.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg25792251#msg25792251

It has. Unfortunately none of that proves or shows what the creator is, if there is indeed a creator.

However, it shows that the Creator is really powerful, and that He is very intelligent, and that He is a very capable designer, and a few other things, as well.

Good place to start... with what science reveals about Him. Then, once you accept that He really exists, you can start to look for ways in which He might be revealing Himself to you in more detail. If you find enough of the right details, you might even find that He is offering you eternal life.

[qwik2learn]

Science is when you make hypotheses and and test them against empirical evidence. The primary function of science is to demonstrate the existence of phenomena that cannot be observed directly.

At the core of materialism, the fundamental component of existence - the nature of consciousness -- is intentionally ignored even though the pioneers of quantum mechanics demonstrated and believed consciousness has a definite role in creating reality. Mainstream materialist theories of consciousness use classical mechanics in assuming consciousness emerged and is produced from "goo"; this reductive materialism is not only incomplete but false. The authors of Irreducible Mind systematically marshal evidence for a variety of psychological phenomena that are extremely difficult, and in some cases clearly impossible, to account for in conventional physicalist terms.

The Case Against Naturalism

[qwik2learn]

bible exists and is the will of god, q.e.d.

The scientific proof for the impossibility of the Bible, is more of the proof that God exists. What I mean is, when you look at the things that are written in the Bible, and the time periods that the things were written in, you can see that there is no way that people could have written with such "connectedness." So, the Bible is impossible, except that it exists. This shows that the guiding hand behind it is God.

BADecker advocates "salvation through faith alone", but the Jesus Seminar has endorsed Christian Universalism. It is noteworthy that the Seminar rejected all of the verses relating to the "Jesus Saves" theology as original to Jesus.

Universal Salvation is the theological position that ALL people will be saved. This concept, present from the earliest days of Christianity, is supported by numerous verses in the Bible, second in number only to those advocating Salvation by Good Works.
https://www.near-death.com/religion/god-is-with-us/the-salvation-conspiracy-how-hell-became-eternal.html

[KpopLord]

Science and religion rarely or never really intersects.

[Astargath]

There wasn't any scientific proof for anything, until somebody developed the idea of scientific proof. Since then there is scientific proof for some things, but no scientific proof for many other things.

Just because somebody hasn't seen the scientific proof doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Just saying that there isn't any scientific proof for God doesn't make it so, unless you can prove it. In the face of the scientific proof that has been shown:
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 ;
the proof has to be scientifically rebutted with real science. If it isn't, the proof stands.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg25792251#msg25792251

It has. Unfortunately none of that proves or shows what the creator is, if there is indeed a creator.

However, it shows that the Creator is really powerful, and that He is very intelligent, and that He is a very capable designer, and a few other things, as well.

Good place to start... with what science reveals about Him. Then, once you accept that He really exists, you can start to look for ways in which He might be revealing Himself to you in more detail. If you find enough of the right details, you might even find that He is offering you eternal life.

How does it reveal there is a creator or a designed? I already explained you the problem with saying that nature is designed. How do you know nature is designed?

[BADecker]

There wasn't any scientific proof for anything, until somebody developed the idea of scientific proof. Since then there is scientific proof for some things, but no scientific proof for many other things.

Just because somebody hasn't seen the scientific proof doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Just saying that there isn't any scientific proof for God doesn't make it so, unless you can prove it. In the face of the scientific proof that has been shown:
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 ;
the proof has to be scientifically rebutted with real science. If it isn't, the proof stands.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg25792251#msg25792251

It has. Unfortunately none of that proves or shows what the creator is, if there is indeed a creator.

However, it shows that the Creator is really powerful, and that He is very intelligent, and that He is a very capable designer, and a few other things, as well.

Good place to start... with what science reveals about Him. Then, once you accept that He really exists, you can start to look for ways in which He might be revealing Himself to you in more detail. If you find enough of the right details, you might even find that He is offering you eternal life.

How does it reveal there is a creator or a designed? I already explained you the problem with saying that nature is designed. How do you know nature is designed?

The universe is a machine of machines. Machines have makers. Are you going to say that machine makers don't design their machines?

[Astargath]

There wasn't any scientific proof for anything, until somebody developed the idea of scientific proof. Since then there is scientific proof for some things, but no scientific proof for many other things.

Just because somebody hasn't seen the scientific proof doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Just saying that there isn't any scientific proof for God doesn't make it so, unless you can prove it. In the face of the scientific proof that has been shown:
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 ;
the proof has to be scientifically rebutted with real science. If it isn't, the proof stands.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg25792251#msg25792251

It has. Unfortunately none of that proves or shows what the creator is, if there is indeed a creator.

However, it shows that the Creator is really powerful, and that He is very intelligent, and that He is a very capable designer, and a few other things, as well.

Good place to start... with what science reveals about Him. Then, once you accept that He really exists, you can start to look for ways in which He might be revealing Himself to you in more detail. If you find enough of the right details, you might even find that He is offering you eternal life.

How does it reveal there is a creator or a designed? I already explained you the problem with saying that nature is designed. How do you know nature is designed?

The universe is a machine of machines. Machines have makers. Are you going to say that machine makers don't design their machines?

The universe is not a machine, not machines do not need makers therefore the universe doesn't have a maker. What kind of circular reasoning are you using here? The bullshit one? What is the definition of machine here?

[BADecker]

There wasn't any scientific proof for anything, until somebody developed the idea of scientific proof. Since then there is scientific proof for some things, but no scientific proof for many other things.

Just because somebody hasn't seen the scientific proof doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Just saying that there isn't any scientific proof for God doesn't make it so, unless you can prove it. In the face of the scientific proof that has been shown:
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 ;
the proof has to be scientifically rebutted with real science. If it isn't, the proof stands.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg25792251#msg25792251

It has. Unfortunately none of that proves or shows what the creator is, if there is indeed a creator.

However, it shows that the Creator is really powerful, and that He is very intelligent, and that He is a very capable designer, and a few other things, as well.

Good place to start... with what science reveals about Him. Then, once you accept that He really exists, you can start to look for ways in which He might be revealing Himself to you in more detail. If you find enough of the right details, you might even find that He is offering you eternal life.

How does it reveal there is a creator or a designed? I already explained you the problem with saying that nature is designed. How do you know nature is designed?

The universe is a machine of machines. Machines have makers. Are you going to say that machine makers don't design their machines?

The universe is not a machine, not machines do not need makers therefore the universe doesn't have a maker. What kind of circular reasoning are you using here? The bullshit one? What is the definition of machine here?

The fact that the universe acts like a machine full of machines, and that all the machines of mankind are based on the machinery of nature, shows that the universe is a machine.

[Astargath]

There wasn't any scientific proof for anything, until somebody developed the idea of scientific proof. Since then there is scientific proof for some things, but no scientific proof for many other things.

Just because somebody hasn't seen the scientific proof doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Just saying that there isn't any scientific proof for God doesn't make it so, unless you can prove it. In the face of the scientific proof that has been shown:
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 ;
the proof has to be scientifically rebutted with real science. If it isn't, the proof stands.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg25792251#msg25792251

It has. Unfortunately none of that proves or shows what the creator is, if there is indeed a creator.

However, it shows that the Creator is really powerful, and that He is very intelligent, and that He is a very capable designer, and a few other things, as well.

Good place to start... with what science reveals about Him. Then, once you accept that He really exists, you can start to look for ways in which He might be revealing Himself to you in more detail. If you find enough of the right details, you might even find that He is offering you eternal life.

How does it reveal there is a creator or a designed? I already explained you the problem with saying that nature is designed. How do you know nature is designed?

The universe is a machine of machines. Machines have makers. Are you going to say that machine makers don't design their machines?

The universe is not a machine, not machines do not need makers therefore the universe doesn't have a maker. What kind of circular reasoning are you using here? The bullshit one? What is the definition of machine here?

The fact that the universe acts like a machine full of machines, and that all the machines of mankind are based on the machinery of nature, shows that the universe is a machine.

What is the definition of machine?

[BADecker]

Science and religion rarely or never really intersects.

Science is simply the discovering "stuff" that religion already knows is there.

[Astargath]

Science and religion rarely or never really intersects.

Science is simply the discovering "stuff" that religion already knows is there.

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Biblical_scientific_errors

Yeaaah, no.

Science is dismissing religion's arguments one by one. We no longer believe in witches, miracles or demonic possessions.

[Vod]

Science is simply the discovering "stuff" that religion already knows is there.

Science has been disproving religion for hundreds of years now...

Pull your head out of the sand, ignorant one.   

[drakegon]

What do you think?
Please share your opinion about this article.


101 Proofs For God

A growing list of common sense Proofs for God.

Proof for God, #65 Mitochondrial Eve and Y-Chromosome Adam

 Genetic scientists seem to be in general agreement that we are all descendants of one woman and one man. This research was fairly recent, starting about 1978. They, of course, do not believe in the creation story of Adam and Eve in the Bible, but their conclusions are getting closer and closer.

In case you have not heard about this, it makes very interesting reading. But I think it raises a number of profound challenges to the Theory of Evolution.

The scientists base the above conclusions on the known facts of human reproduction, specifically on properties of the sperm and egg. .....
Full article read here: http://101proofsforgod.blogspot.com/2014/07/65-mitochondial-eve-and-y-chromosome.html

What evidence could science give for the existance of an imaginary beeing? This is nonsense.

[qwik2learn]

The Case Against Naturalism

Computer Scientists 'Prove' God Exists


For centuries, many have tried to use this kind of abstract reasoning to prove the possibility or necessity of the existence of God. But the mathematical model composed by Gödel proposed a proof of the idea. Its theorems and axioms -- assumptions which cannot be proven -- can be expressed as mathematical equations. And that means they can be proven.

[Vod]

assumptions which cannot be proven -- can be expressed as mathematical equations. And that means they can be proven.

You just assume all equations can be proven.  I agree that assumption cannot be proven.

Therefore your conclusion that a god exists is just an assumption. 

[BADecker]

assumptions which cannot be proven -- can be expressed as mathematical equations. And that means they can be proven.

You just assume all equations can be proven.  I agree that assumption cannot be proven.

Therefore your conclusion that a god exists is just an assumption. 

Bravo! An A+ in political science for you. More and more political science from you is all we need. The more you blab, the more you show that you are stupidity's excuse for existence.

 

[Astargath]

assumptions which cannot be proven -- can be expressed as mathematical equations. And that means they can be proven.

You just assume all equations can be proven.  I agree that assumption cannot be proven.

Therefore your conclusion that a god exists is just an assumption. 

Bravo! An A+ in political science for you. More and more political science from you is all we need. The more you blab, the more you show that you are stupidity's excuse for existence.

 

All your proof is circular reasoning that when applied to something else can prove something else.