Scientific proof that God exists?

[Vod]

I mean, once you realize that God exists, then you have to find out about Him enough to be saved. Just know that He exists doesn't automatically bring salvation.

There is nothing you can do to be loved by god.

He knew his plan for you from the moment he created you.  He gives you free will but he knows what you will do. 

When he created you he already knew you would reject him and he would torture you for all eternity. 

^ ^  Can you imagine living in BD's head?  :/

[1715185972]

1715185972

[Dewi11]

I believe that God exists, everything that exists is God's creation.
manuasia can not create wind, fire and human life
if you do not believe that means you're crazy,

[Vod]

if you do not believe that means you're crazy,

Right.

You are crazy if you believe all the repeated observations by millions of people of evolution.
You are crazy if you ignore magical fairy tales.

You idiots need to find your own forum.  :/

[joms07]

Science has long since moved on from trying to demonstrate that god exists, and is busy figuring out precisely how it works. If the existence of a god were as easy to demonstrate as love

[Astargath]

The usual garbage full of fallacies and misinformation...

I do not believe that god exists, I have never seen science show any evidence that God exists in this world, God is only in the imagination of every human being, I know that God is one People are respectable but they are not real

Cause and effect exists in everything we have found. So does entropy. So does complexity. Combining these scientifically shows that God exists. Why? Because these 3 couldn't exist in the universe without something that fits our definition of "God."

The whole operation of the universe is complex machinery. Machines have makers.

You never explained why complexity means that something was designed.

''The whole operation of the universe is complex machinery'' Keep making shit up. Not all machines have makers, a rock doesn't have a designer.

All machinery that we know is machinery, has designers. All the machine operations of this machinery use nature's machine operations. Everything is machinery. Machines have makers. Complex machines have complex makers. Machines as complex as the machines of nature and the universe, have such a complex Maker that He fits the definition of our word "God."

Thank you for prompting me to give a better explanation. I hope you stop denying the fact of God's existence before you deny yourself out of existence. I mean, once you realize that God exists, then you have to find out about Him enough to be saved. Just know that He exists doesn't automatically bring salvation.

Why are you recycling the same bad and flawed argument?

 ''Everything is machinery.''

''All machinery that we know is machinery, has designers.'' No, we just know our things are designed because we know humans make things. We know a bottle is designed because we know bottles are made by humans and not found in nature, we didn't get inspired by nature to create bottles. Now you are jumping from, we know humans make stuff to, everything is a machine and therefore everything is designed. I mean, what? why? wtf? Nothing indicates a rock is designed.

If we see a house,… we conclude, with the greatest certainty, that it had an architect or builder because this is precisely that species of effect which we have experienced to proceed from that species of cause. But surely you will not affirm that the universe bears such a resemblance to a house that we can with the same certainty infer a similar cause, or that the analogy is here entire and perfect (Hume, Dialogues, Part II).

Second, Hume argues that, even if the resemblance between the material universe and human artifacts justified thinking they have similar causes, it would not justify thinking that an all-perfect God exists and created the world. For example, there is nothing in the argument that would warrant the inference that the creator of the universe is perfectly intelligent or perfectly good. Indeed, Hume argues that there is nothing there that would justify thinking even that there is just one deity: "what shadow of an argument... can you produce from your hypothesis to prove the unity of the Deity?

Animals, plants, humans, are far from perfect, nothing indicates that an all powerful god created them.

[BADecker]

The usual garbage full of fallacies and misinformation...

I do not believe that god exists, I have never seen science show any evidence that God exists in this world, God is only in the imagination of every human being, I know that God is one People are respectable but they are not real

Cause and effect exists in everything we have found. So does entropy. So does complexity. Combining these scientifically shows that God exists. Why? Because these 3 couldn't exist in the universe without something that fits our definition of "God."

The whole operation of the universe is complex machinery. Machines have makers.

You never explained why complexity means that something was designed.

''The whole operation of the universe is complex machinery'' Keep making shit up. Not all machines have makers, a rock doesn't have a designer.

All machinery that we know is machinery, has designers. All the machine operations of this machinery use nature's machine operations. Everything is machinery. Machines have makers. Complex machines have complex makers. Machines as complex as the machines of nature and the universe, have such a complex Maker that He fits the definition of our word "God."

Thank you for prompting me to give a better explanation. I hope you stop denying the fact of God's existence before you deny yourself out of existence. I mean, once you realize that God exists, then you have to find out about Him enough to be saved. Just know that He exists doesn't automatically bring salvation.

Why are you recycling the same bad and flawed argument?

 ''Everything is machinery.''

''All machinery that we know is machinery, has designers.'' No, we just know our things are designed because we know humans make things. We know a bottle is designed because we know bottles are made by humans and not found in nature, we didn't get inspired by nature to create bottles. Now you are jumping from, we know humans make stuff to, everything is a machine and therefore everything is designed. I mean, what? why? wtf? Nothing indicates a rock is designed.

If we see a house,… we conclude, with the greatest certainty, that it had an architect or builder because this is precisely that species of effect which we have experienced to proceed from that species of cause. But surely you will not affirm that the universe bears such a resemblance to a house that we can with the same certainty infer a similar cause, or that the analogy is here entire and perfect (Hume, Dialogues, Part II).

Second, Hume argues that, even if the resemblance between the material universe and human artifacts justified thinking they have similar causes, it would not justify thinking that an all-perfect God exists and created the world. For example, there is nothing in the argument that would warrant the inference that the creator of the universe is perfectly intelligent or perfectly good. Indeed, Hume argues that there is nothing there that would justify thinking even that there is just one deity: "what shadow of an argument... can you produce from your hypothesis to prove the unity of the Deity?

Animals, plants, humans, are far from perfect, nothing indicates that an all powerful god created them.

All of our machinery is made out of and uses the machinery of nature. Since our machines are machinery of nature, nature is machinery. Are you trying to say that our machines haven't been designed? You are getting a little nutty.

God is exceedingly complex, to use our understanding. You are simply avoiding the devil, Satan, when you suggest that God didn't make things perfect. Besides, imperfection suggests that things don't work, yet even life and death work very well. Things are not destroyed. they work. God's pefection has overcome the imperfection of the devil.

[BADecker]

if you do not believe that means you're crazy,

Right.

You are crazy if you believe all the repeated observations by millions of people of evolution.
You are crazy if you ignore magical fairy tales.

You idiots need to find your own forum.  :/

All you are trying to do is suggest that creation and evolution are the same thing. You are the one who is a little (more than a little) crazy.

[Blackmet]

God is just something that many people can't even imagine that's why they have no proofs about exisiting of him or her or maybe even it. People are strange.

[jamalisa]

for the moment I have not been able to explain because the science that I have not completed the goal there

[BADecker]

Again, the scientific proof for God is shown here:
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.
Get the info from the links, and research it.

Science is starting to even teach in their schools that there is a Something out there somewhere, that put this whole universe together.

[Janinjo11]

For those who believe in God - if there is a God than the Earth is flat! Right?

[BADecker]

For those who believe in God - if there is a God than the Earth is flat! Right?

Well, almost. Since we are talking science, and scientific proof, then your wording should be, "If you believe there is a God, then you believe the earth is flat, right?"

You are off topic. You are talking religion, not scientific proof... just like the FE people.

[realtoken]

i dont think that this makes any sense

[BADecker]

i dont think that this makes any sense

But do you have any scientific proof that it doesn't?   

[1-DevelopEX]

I have this feeling under me after i read some pointers in the comments here in your thread, and amaze how people disagree about God existence and talk about nothingness and meaninglessness assuming what they say is meaningful.

[temorkebun]

So this is the new discovery of the scientists who will break Darwin's theory? Is not this already described in the book, for example as in the Gospels and the Qur'an. I think it's just a matter of Faith.

[sirazimuth]

Answer to the OPs title: There is no proof.

There is difficulty in proving anything. The evidence for God is extremely great.

Scientists and medical researchers are finding that all of nature acts like a gigantic machine. This nature-machine is extremely complex, way beyond man's present understanding. Yet, they can't find a source that could have built the machine. So they try to attribute it to millions and billions of years of happenstance. The only thing that we see over long periods of time is decay. Never an increase in complexity.

Consider Bitcoin. How many thousands (or hundreds of thousands) of years will it take to crack the encryption in the blockchain? We all accept the complexity involved in Bitcoin. Yet it has taken years for people, "machine makers," to figure the Bitcoin thing out. The best programming technicians might be able to do the programming, but it doesn't make them able to crack the encryption.

Nature is like this, except that we haven't even come close to figuring out the programming, yet. And for sure, if we EVER figured out the programming, it would be untold, unimaginable eons of ADDITIONAL time before we could crack the encryption. But if we could crack the encryption, could we ever figure out what the Programmer of the universe was truly like?

The point is, Whoever, Whatever the Programmer of the universe is, He/She/It is way beyond anything that we will ever find on our own. And this is the reason why we use the word "God." The only way we will ever understand God is if He stoops down and reveals Himself to us (He did it in the Bible).

The REAL question isn't something like, "Are you serious that you think God exists?" Rather, the question is, "What are you doing involving yourself with Bitcoin if you, even slightly, think that God does NOT exist?" Bye!

i dont think that this makes any sense

he hasn't been making any sense in this thread for almost 3 and a half  years.
you think he's gonna start now?  

[miyaka1014]

The bible is the living proof that God exists... It's just like the wind,  you don't see it but you can feel it that's why you believe that there's a wind.

[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.

Researchers have cracked the "GOD CODE", they used computers to validate the axioms that refute Naturalism and confirm the necessity of the existence of GOD.

I find it strange that atheists and skeptics in this thread did not address the computerized proof of GOD that I referenced. After all, is this not exactly the sort of proof that an atheist would expect and demand to see?

[Astargath]

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.

Researchers have cracked the "GOD CODE", they used computers to validate the axioms that refute Naturalism and confirm the necessity of the existence of GOD.

I find it strange that atheists and skeptics in this thread did not address the computerized proof of GOD that I referenced. After all, is this not exactly the sort of proof that an atheist would expect and demand to see?

I actually did, quite in detail actually: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=737322.msg27336707#msg27336707

You might have missed it.

Godel's proof consists of the following argument

God is defined as that which is greater than anything else

We can imagine God

Since a real God is greater than an imaginary God, and God by definition is greater than everything

God must be real

The German scientists took this argument, translated it to math, and proved it works. However, they took Godel's argument as sound, so naturally the came out with the same result. However, his argument has flaws:

1) How do we know God is greater than anything else? Before we have proof of God, we are incapable of defining him.

2) Why should a real God be greater than an imaginary God? I can imagine perfection, but I have yet to encounter it in real life. I would argue that imaginary things are often better than their real world counterparts.

Godel's argument uses flawed assumptions, and the German programmers used those same flawed assumptions