Scientific proof that God exists?

[Cortex7]

to me, death makes 'life' significant

I concur.

[BADecker]

to me, death makes 'life' significant

Well, that's what salvation by God is about... eternal life. 

[username18333]

Instead of that former, answer that following: What makes "death" significant?

The absolute most significant thing about death is, death locks one into his belief position regarding God. If one believes in God for salvation at the time of death, he will receive salvation. If he does not believe in God for salvation, he will lose salvation.

Other than that, there are many things that make death significant. Some of them hold significance for relatives of the deceased. Why do you ask this?

Fear of being afraid is that sole sustenance of death.

Do you mean that if a person is not afraid of fear, that he would not die? Lots of folks watch horror movies just so that they can analyze their own fear.  

"Sustenance" implies prolonged procession.

True. Generally if you are sustained in life, your life is prolonged. Interesting point in the idea of proving God scientifically thread. Why this in this thread?

The matter¹ of God is one of² life and death.

¹ that's both the consistence and debate "matter"
² that's consistence "of"

[BADecker]

Instead of that former, answer that following: What makes "death" significant?

The absolute most significant thing about death is, death locks one into his belief position regarding God. If one believes in God for salvation at the time of death, he will receive salvation. If he does not believe in God for salvation, he will lose salvation.

Other than that, there are many things that make death significant. Some of them hold significance for relatives of the deceased. Why do you ask this?

Fear of being afraid is that sole sustenance of death.

Do you mean that if a person is not afraid of fear, that he would not die? Lots of folks watch horror movies just so that they can analyze their own fear.  

"Sustenance" implies prolonged procession.

True. Generally if you are sustained in life, your life is prolonged. Interesting point in the idea of proving God scientifically thread. Why this in this thread?

The matter¹ of God is one of² life and death.

¹ that's both the consistence and debate "matter"
² that's consistence "of"

Bible passage: "With God nothing shall be impossible."

Empty space, no matter how little material exists therein, contains no nothing.

[username18333]

Instead of that former, answer that following: What makes "death" significant?

The absolute most significant thing about death is, death locks one into his belief position regarding God. If one believes in God for salvation at the time of death, he will receive salvation. If he does not believe in God for salvation, he will lose salvation.

Other than that, there are many things that make death significant. Some of them hold significance for relatives of the deceased. Why do you ask this?

Fear of being afraid is that sole sustenance of death.

Do you mean that if a person is not afraid of fear, that he would not die? Lots of folks watch horror movies just so that they can analyze their own fear.  

"Sustenance" implies prolonged procession.

True. Generally if you are sustained in life, your life is prolonged. Interesting point in the idea of proving God scientifically thread. Why this in this thread?

The matter¹ of God is one of² life and death.

¹ that's both the consistence and debate "matter"
² that's consistence "of"

Bible passage: "With God nothing shall be impossible."

Empty space, no matter how little material exists therein, contains no nothing.

How does the Greek read?

[BADecker]

Instead of that former, answer that following: What makes "death" significant?

The absolute most significant thing about death is, death locks one into his belief position regarding God. If one believes in God for salvation at the time of death, he will receive salvation. If he does not believe in God for salvation, he will lose salvation.

Other than that, there are many things that make death significant. Some of them hold significance for relatives of the deceased. Why do you ask this?

Fear of being afraid is that sole sustenance of death.

Do you mean that if a person is not afraid of fear, that he would not die? Lots of folks watch horror movies just so that they can analyze their own fear.  

"Sustenance" implies prolonged procession.

True. Generally if you are sustained in life, your life is prolonged. Interesting point in the idea of proving God scientifically thread. Why this in this thread?

The matter¹ of God is one of² life and death.

¹ that's both the consistence and debate "matter"
² that's consistence "of"

Bible passage: "With God nothing shall be impossible."

Empty space, no matter how little material exists therein, contains no nothing.

How does the Greek read?

From http://www.greekbible.com/index.php :

"ὅτι oὐκ ἀδυνατήσει παρὰ τoῦ θεoῦ πᾶν ῥῆμα."

I don't read Greek, but there are a lot of websites that have the New Testament in Greek in case you are interested. The Bible passage I attempted to quote, above, was Luke 1:37.

[vokain]

speaking of Luke...

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/atlantean_conspiracy/atlantean_conspiracy44.htm

related: http://www.sabbathtruth.com/sabbath-history/how-the-sabbath-was-changed

2nd related: http://www.ohotto.com/features/astrological_ages_tour.asp

[username18333]

Instead of that former, answer that following: What makes "death" significant?

The absolute most significant thing about death is, death locks one into his belief position regarding God. If one believes in God for salvation at the time of death, he will receive salvation. If he does not believe in God for salvation, he will lose salvation.

Other than that, there are many things that make death significant. Some of them hold significance for relatives of the deceased. Why do you ask this?

Fear of being afraid is that sole sustenance of death.

Do you mean that if a person is not afraid of fear, that he would not die? Lots of folks watch horror movies just so that they can analyze their own fear.  

"Sustenance" implies prolonged procession.

True. Generally if you are sustained in life, your life is prolonged. Interesting point in the idea of proving God scientifically thread. Why this in this thread?

The matter¹ of God is one of² life and death.

¹ that's both the consistence and debate "matter"
² that's consistence "of"

Bible passage: "With God nothing shall be impossible."

Empty space, no matter how little material exists therein, contains no nothing.

How does the Greek read?

From http://www.greekbible.com/index.php :

"ὅτι oὐκ ἀδυνατήσει παρὰ τoῦ θεoῦ πᾶν ῥῆμα."

I don't read Greek, but there are a lot of websites that have the New Testament in Greek in case you are interested. The Bible passage I attempted to quote, above, was Luke 1:37.

("Nothing" isn't in there [from what I checked].)

"For with God no thing shall be vnpossible" (KJV).

Therewithin, anything that one following ("For with...") God would proceed unto ("...no thing...") should prove ("...shall be...") wholly within their effectuation ("...vnpossible.") because ("For...") they so follow ("...with God...").

[BCEmporium]

You are still debating a mythological figure whose only proof of existence is a book that must be considered true because that book itself says so?!  

How about we start to discuss unicorns and minotaurs now?

[vokain]

You are still debating a mythological figure whose only proof of existence is a book that must be considered true because that book itself says so?!  

How about we start to discuss unicorns and minotaurs now?

not just a few books that say so, but the Universe all around

[BCEmporium]

yeah right...
True statement: "we don't know"
Delusional statement: "it was God"

Curiously enough, God has no idea about the Universe, 99% of scientific assertions from religion are way wrong and attached to its time's belief. A more than sufficient evidence that "we" created God, not the other way around.

[bl4kjaguar]

You are still debating a mythological figure whose only proof of existence is a book that must be considered true because that book itself says so?!  

How about we start to discuss unicorns and minotaurs now?

not just a few books that say so, but the Universe all around

God says,
"Read it all so that you can judge in wisdom"!

[BADecker]

You are still debating a mythological figure whose only proof of existence is a book that must be considered true because that book itself says so?!  

How about we start to discuss unicorns and minotaurs now?

You are still debating from a "me want" position, rather than a position displayed by the universe?

[username18333]

You are still debating a mythological figure whose only proof of existence is a book that must be considered true because that book itself says so?!  

How about we start to discuss unicorns and minotaurs now?

See that following:

(The second segment of emboldened text was highlighted by "cooldgamer.")

So Dicksperiment, any proof of those 50btc you own?  

Yeah, Decky. Take Vod on his honor, and send him the bitcoins. He'll send 'em back if he loses.  

He asked him to sign the address, not send him the coins

On topic: no matter how much you guys debate how entropy works, it still doesn't prove there is a god.  Seems to be the latest buzzword for trying to disprove evolution, even though scientists have already debunked that idea.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/thermo.html

You missed a detail of our conversation. (See the emboldened portion.)

Boil glass of water, colouring will stick to sides.

By what means shall you boil such that you do not introduce "new disorder" into yourself (as per the requirements)?

Ok, I'll sit it out knowing the water will evaporate, and leave the colouring behind. I promise not to touch it

That introduces new disorder into the environment, the diffusion of the water molecules through the atmosphere.

You introduced this disorder, not I, I just sat and fell asleep watching it.. remember your up against someone who will get to the truth of the matter, in that you chose water, knowing it would evaporate of it's own accord, I had no say in this scientific fact, I merely debunked the question, using nothing.

Edit: twas a good question, you had me thinking, but it is also an invalid question with regards to your point, due to the fact you forgot water is constantly changing.

That "constant change" illustrates (part of) my point: entropy does, indeed, proceed towards a maximum.

What was then to be argued is that existence is an isolated system and, therefore, subject to the maximization of entropy, and that this "maximization" begets the manifestation of everything (not read: "everything that exists" [though, that's technically accurate]).

By thermodynamics, existence, which is an isolated system, would "spontaneously evolve towards thermodynamic equilibrium, the configuration with maximum entropy" (Wikipedia).

Nothing, then, is lost to everything.

It is to be inferred from there that God necessarily exists.

In a closed system entropy does increase, buuut...

However, they neglect the fact that life is not a closed system. The sun provides more than enough energy to drive things. If a mature tomato plant can have more usable energy than the seed it grew from, why should anyone expect that the next generation of tomatoes can't have more usable energy still? Creationists sometimes try to get around this by claiming that the information carried by living things lets them create order. However, not only is life irrelevant to the 2nd law, but order from disorder is common in nonliving systems, too. Snowflakes, sand dunes, tornadoes, stalactites, graded river beds, and lightning are just a few examples of order coming from disorder in nature; none require an intelligent program to achieve that order. In any nontrivial system with lots of energy flowing through it, you are almost certain to find order arising somewhere in the system. If order from disorder is supposed to violate the 2nd law of thermodynamics, why is it ubiquitous in nature?

That demonstrates my final assertion above: God would be the ultimate manifestation of that order within existence.

I misunderstood your argument, my bad.  You are simply using the god of the gaps.  There are many ways that the minimum entropy state could have come about, and since we don't know you're throwing god in there.

For example, the big crunch theory:

In physical cosmology, the Big Crunch is one possible scenario for the ultimate fate of the universe, in which the metric expansion of space eventually reverses and the universe recollapses, ultimately ending as a black hole singularity or causing a reformation of the universe starting with another big bang.

I asserted God to be the acme of "minimum entropy state."

[BADecker]

I asserted God to be the acme of "minimum entropy state."

We don't know that this is God. We don't even know that this is the crux of God. We have never seen something like minimum entropy in this universe. In fact, there may be no minimum entropy. That is, there might be such a thing as NO entropy.

God totally might be from elsewhere and else-when. He might be totally from somewhere that has nothing to do with entropy or lack of it, or any of the laws of this universe, whatsoever. In fact, if the universe is about 6,000 years old like the Bible says, God must have kick-started a whole lot of it into action after He set it in place. Being part of anything we know about this universe would make such a thing impossible.

The point? "... acme of 'minimum entropy state,'" is a good guess... another idea to consider. But probably there are aspects of God that are so extremely different than ANYTHING in this universe, that the word "different" is completely inapplicable.

[username18333]

I asserted God to be the acme of "minimum entropy state."

We don't know that this is God. We don't even know that this is the crux of God. We have never seen something like minimum entropy in this universe. In fact, there may be no minimum entropy. That is, there might be such a thing as NO entropy.

God totally might be from elsewhere and else-when. He might be totally from somewhere that has nothing to do with entropy or lack of it, or any of the laws of this universe, whatsoever. In fact, if the universe is about 6,000 years old like the Bible says, God must have kick-started a whole lot of it into action after He set it in place. Being part of anything we know about this universe would make such a thing impossible.

The point? "... acme of 'minimum entropy state,'" is a good guess... another idea to consider. But probably there are aspects of God that are so extremely different than ANYTHING in this universe, that the word "different" is completely inapplicable.

Reconsidering, God would seem a minimum entropy state of existence (which isn't solely this mere universe).

[BADecker]

I asserted God to be the acme of "minimum entropy state."

We don't know that this is God. We don't even know that this is the crux of God. We have never seen something like minimum entropy in this universe. In fact, there may be no minimum entropy. That is, there might be such a thing as NO entropy.

God totally might be from elsewhere and else-when. He might be totally from somewhere that has nothing to do with entropy or lack of it, or any of the laws of this universe, whatsoever. In fact, if the universe is about 6,000 years old like the Bible says, God must have kick-started a whole lot of it into action after He set it in place. Being part of anything we know about this universe would make such a thing impossible.

The point? "... acme of 'minimum entropy state,'" is a good guess... another idea to consider. But probably there are aspects of God that are so extremely different than ANYTHING in this universe, that the word "different" is completely inapplicable.

Reconsidering, God would seem a minimum entropy state of existence (which isn't soley this mere universe).

How do we know? Maybe entropy or non-entropy doesn't apply to God. Maybe He just uses it. We hardly know what this universe is all about. How can we tell much of anything about God? Of course, I don't know that God isn't a minimum entropy state.

[username18333]

I asserted God to be the acme of "minimum entropy state."

We don't know that this is God. We don't even know that this is the crux of God. We have never seen something like minimum entropy in this universe. In fact, there may be no minimum entropy. That is, there might be such a thing as NO entropy.

God totally might be from elsewhere and else-when. He might be totally from somewhere that has nothing to do with entropy or lack of it, or any of the laws of this universe, whatsoever. In fact, if the universe is about 6,000 years old like the Bible says, God must have kick-started a whole lot of it into action after He set it in place. Being part of anything we know about this universe would make such a thing impossible.

The point? "... acme of 'minimum entropy state,'" is a good guess... another idea to consider. But probably there are aspects of God that are so extremely different than ANYTHING in this universe, that the word "different" is completely inapplicable.

Reconsidering, God would seem a minimum entropy state of existence (which isn't soley this mere universe).

How do we know? Maybe entropy or non-entropy doesn't apply to God. Maybe He just uses it. We hardly know what this universe is all about. How can we tell much of anything about God? Of course, I don't know that God isn't a minimum entropy state.

"...existence (which isn't solely this mere universe)."

[BADecker]

I asserted God to be the acme of "minimum entropy state."

We don't know that this is God. We don't even know that this is the crux of God. We have never seen something like minimum entropy in this universe. In fact, there may be no minimum entropy. That is, there might be such a thing as NO entropy.

God totally might be from elsewhere and else-when. He might be totally from somewhere that has nothing to do with entropy or lack of it, or any of the laws of this universe, whatsoever. In fact, if the universe is about 6,000 years old like the Bible says, God must have kick-started a whole lot of it into action after He set it in place. Being part of anything we know about this universe would make such a thing impossible.

The point? "... acme of 'minimum entropy state,'" is a good guess... another idea to consider. But probably there are aspects of God that are so extremely different than ANYTHING in this universe, that the word "different" is completely inapplicable.

Reconsidering, God would seem a minimum entropy state of existence (which isn't soley this mere universe).

How do we know? Maybe entropy or non-entropy doesn't apply to God. Maybe He just uses it. We hardly know what this universe is all about. How can we tell much of anything about God? Of course, I don't know that God isn't a minimum entropy state.

"...existence (which isn't solely this mere universe)."

I am not disagreeing. Yet, how can we use logic on something that is "un-logic," but uses logic at the same time?

[username18333]

I asserted God to be the acme of "minimum entropy state."

We don't know that this is God. We don't even know that this is the crux of God. We have never seen something like minimum entropy in this universe. In fact, there may be no minimum entropy. That is, there might be such a thing as NO entropy.

God totally might be from elsewhere and else-when. He might be totally from somewhere that has nothing to do with entropy or lack of it, or any of the laws of this universe, whatsoever. In fact, if the universe is about 6,000 years old like the Bible says, God must have kick-started a whole lot of it into action after He set it in place. Being part of anything we know about this universe would make such a thing impossible.

The point? "... acme of 'minimum entropy state,'" is a good guess... another idea to consider. But probably there are aspects of God that are so extremely different than ANYTHING in this universe, that the word "different" is completely inapplicable.

Reconsidering, God would seem a minimum entropy state of existence (which isn't soley this mere universe).

How do we know? Maybe entropy or non-entropy doesn't apply to God. Maybe He just uses it. We hardly know what this universe is all about. How can we tell much of anything about God? Of course, I don't know that God isn't a minimum entropy state.

"...existence (which isn't solely this mere universe)."

I am not disagreeing. Yet, how can we use logic on something that is "un-logic," but uses logic at the same time?

(You're confusing "without" with "within.")

By inference, one may arrive upon a measure of that without rational intelligibility.