Scientific proof that God exists?

[Decksperiment]

Pray tell me the difference between masonic/biblical initiation, I think it's about time I tested some of that!!

[1715102285]

1715102285

[1715102285]

1715102285

[1715102285]

1715102285

[1715102285]

1715102285

[1715102285]

1715102285

[bl4kjaguar]

study His character and this is done by reading the Bible in it's entirety, both the Old and the New Testament.  

We can also "know God" by spending time in prayer as well.

He says, "His sheep know His voice."

How is it that there are only two written volumes containing recorded transcriptions of God's voice?

Can one really know God's voice if one is reading a translation?

God spoke the universe into being. Therefore, the universe is His word. However, because of our triviality, we will never see much of God by looking at the universe. How can you tell? Just look at all the atheistic scientists.

God gave us the two volumes so that we can make sense of Him... a sense that we can't see in the complex, gigantic universe. Nobody understands anything exactly the same way as anyone else. Everyone has his own inner, private interpretation, even though the outer one may be similar to outer interpretations of many other people.

The Word of God in the two volumes speaks to the heart of the reader.

If the whole universe is the word, why did God only give us two volumes? He can't do any better? He doesn't need to give us more guidance?

His angels are not delivering messages to us? It is most absurd to limit yourself to two volumes when you are talking about GOD.

[bl4kjaguar]

study His character and this is done by reading the Bible in it's entirety, both the Old and the New Testament.  

We can also "know God" by spending time in prayer as well.

He says, "His sheep know His voice."

How is it that there are only two written volumes containing recorded transcriptions of God's voice?

Can one really know God's voice if one is reading a translation?

My husband likes to read the New Testament in Greek.  Feel free to study Biblical Greek, as well as Hebrew for the Old Testament, if it concerns you that reading a "translation" makes it hard to know God's voice.

Fortunately, I feel that many of the translations are fairly accurate to the original texts so this isn't a huge concern to me.

That said, I do believe God still speaks to us today.  Why are the scriptures that we have the only canonized scriptures?  Well that is a debate in of itself, but there were good reasons why some books were included and some were not.  

There are political reasons that certain books were included and others were not; also, there are political reasons for the translations of key words.
Reincarnation
Ekklesia

That is not even the point.
Without the original renderings, there is no inspired text.
Christ never set up a church nor did he set up a canon, that was all done by men of this world. Christ warned you about Pharisees (Matthew 23), Christ also told you exactly who rules this world, your volumes will not escape that corruption because they are of this world and a great many of those books come from a Pharisee (see Acts 23:6, Matthew 5:20).

The nature of the soul is indeed a complicated study and humanity has yet to master all that there is to know about itself. This is why religion exists. To limit yourself to two volumes (consisting of books chosen by men) is really absurd, ESPECIALLY IF GOD IS ALWAYS SPEAKING TO YOU AND EVERYONE ELSE.

To those tampered volumes I say "no thanks"; they are useful study, but I have heard God's voice in plain English with over 100 volumes, and it speaks about the reality of life and the illusion of death, not just "one life after death and a 'savior' that will take away your responsibility", which is the most irreligious sentiment that I have ever heard. God will forgive those mistakes made in ignorance, but do you think that God's forgiveness can excuse you from seeking out the real truth which is at all times being spoken to everyone and even being recorded?

How are you going to recognize the truth without both a reference point and a search?
See The Problem of the Criterion from Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy

[RodeoX]

God is real. Period.

Well, you can't argue with that logic. Literally.

lol.

[BADecker]

study His character and this is done by reading the Bible in it's entirety, both the Old and the New Testament.  

We can also "know God" by spending time in prayer as well.

He says, "His sheep know His voice."

How is it that there are only two written volumes containing recorded transcriptions of God's voice?

Can one really know God's voice if one is reading a translation?

My husband likes to read the New Testament in Greek.  Feel free to study Biblical Greek, as well as Hebrew for the Old Testament, if it concerns you that reading a "translation" makes it hard to know God's voice.

Fortunately, I feel that many of the translations are fairly accurate to the original texts so this isn't a huge concern to me.

That said, I do believe God still speaks to us today.  Why are the scriptures that we have the only canonized scriptures?  Well that is a debate in of itself, but there were good reasons why some books were included and some were not.  

There are political reasons that certain books were included and others were not; also, there are political reasons for the translations of key words.
Reincarnation
Ekklesia

That is not even the point.
Without the original renderings, there is no inspired text.
Christ never set up a church nor did he set up a canon, that was all done by men of this world. Christ warned you about Pharisees (Matthew 23), Christ also told you exactly who rules this world, your volumes will not escape that corruption because they are of this world and a great many of those books come from a Pharisee (see Acts 23:6, Matthew 5:20).

The nature of the soul is indeed a complicated study and humanity has yet to master all that there is to know about itself. This is why religion exists. To limit yourself to two volumes (consisting of books chosen by men) is really absurd, ESPECIALLY IF GOD IS ALWAYS SPEAKING TO YOU AND EVERYONE ELSE.

To those tampered volumes I say "no thanks"; they are useful study, but I have heard God's voice in plain English with over 100 volumes, and it speaks about the reality of life and the illusion of death, not just "one life after death and a 'savior' that will take away your responsibility", which is the most irreligious sentiment that I have ever heard. God will forgive those mistakes made in ignorance, but do you think that God's forgiveness can excuse you from seeking out the real truth which is at all times being spoken to everyone and even being recorded?

How are you going to recognize the truth without both a reference point and a search?
See The Problem of the Criterion from Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy

One of the very important things that the Bible tells us in this regard is, the devil makes himself look like an angel of light. 2 Corinthians 11:14:

And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light.

So, who did you hear when you thought you heard God talking those more than 100 volumes in English?

[the joint]

study His character and this is done by reading the Bible in it's entirety, both the Old and the New Testament.  

We can also "know God" by spending time in prayer as well.

He says, "His sheep know His voice."

How is it that there are only two written volumes containing recorded transcriptions of God's voice?

Can one really know God's voice if one is reading a translation?

My husband likes to read the New Testament in Greek.  Feel free to study Biblical Greek, as well as Hebrew for the Old Testament, if it concerns you that reading a "translation" makes it hard to know God's voice.

Fortunately, I feel that many of the translations are fairly accurate to the original texts so this isn't a huge concern to me.

That said, I do believe God still speaks to us today.  Why are the scriptures that we have the only canonized scriptures?  Well that is a debate in of itself, but there were good reasons why some books were included and some were not.  

There are political reasons that certain books were included and others were not; also, there are political reasons for the translations of key words.
Reincarnation
Ekklesia

That is not even the point.
Without the original renderings, there is no inspired text.
Christ never set up a church nor did he set up a canon, that was all done by men of this world. Christ warned you about Pharisees (Matthew 23), Christ also told you exactly who rules this world, your volumes will not escape that corruption because they are of this world and a great many of those books come from a Pharisee (see Acts 23:6, Matthew 5:20).

The nature of the soul is indeed a complicated study and humanity has yet to master all that there is to know about itself. This is why religion exists. To limit yourself to two volumes (consisting of books chosen by men) is really absurd, ESPECIALLY IF GOD IS ALWAYS SPEAKING TO YOU AND EVERYONE ELSE.

To those tampered volumes I say "no thanks"; they are useful study, but I have heard God's voice in plain English with over 100 volumes, and it speaks about the reality of life and the illusion of death, not just "one life after death and a 'savior' that will take away your responsibility", which is the most irreligious sentiment that I have ever heard. God will forgive those mistakes made in ignorance, but do you think that God's forgiveness can excuse you from seeking out the real truth which is at all times being spoken to everyone and even being recorded?

How are you going to recognize the truth without both a reference point and a search?
See The Problem of the Criterion from Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy

One of the very important things that the Bible tells us in this regard is, the devil makes himself look like an angel of light. 2 Corinthians 11:14:

And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light.

So, who did you hear when you thought you heard God talking those more than 100 volumes in English?

If I was Satan, and if I wanted to deceive the people, I would write the Bible and pretend to be God and claim that it was written under divine influence.  Then I'd have a couple billion Christians thinking that they're preaching the word of God as written in the Bible, when in reality it's the influence of Satan.

Wouldn't that be a trip -- to think that, all this time, you've been believing you're preaching the word of God like a good Christian, and maybe you're just a Satanist?

[BADecker]

study His character and this is done by reading the Bible in it's entirety, both the Old and the New Testament.  

We can also "know God" by spending time in prayer as well.

He says, "His sheep know His voice."

How is it that there are only two written volumes containing recorded transcriptions of God's voice?

Can one really know God's voice if one is reading a translation?

My husband likes to read the New Testament in Greek.  Feel free to study Biblical Greek, as well as Hebrew for the Old Testament, if it concerns you that reading a "translation" makes it hard to know God's voice.

Fortunately, I feel that many of the translations are fairly accurate to the original texts so this isn't a huge concern to me.

That said, I do believe God still speaks to us today.  Why are the scriptures that we have the only canonized scriptures?  Well that is a debate in of itself, but there were good reasons why some books were included and some were not.  

There are political reasons that certain books were included and others were not; also, there are political reasons for the translations of key words.
Reincarnation
Ekklesia

That is not even the point.
Without the original renderings, there is no inspired text.
Christ never set up a church nor did he set up a canon, that was all done by men of this world. Christ warned you about Pharisees (Matthew 23), Christ also told you exactly who rules this world, your volumes will not escape that corruption because they are of this world and a great many of those books come from a Pharisee (see Acts 23:6, Matthew 5:20).

The nature of the soul is indeed a complicated study and humanity has yet to master all that there is to know about itself. This is why religion exists. To limit yourself to two volumes (consisting of books chosen by men) is really absurd, ESPECIALLY IF GOD IS ALWAYS SPEAKING TO YOU AND EVERYONE ELSE.

To those tampered volumes I say "no thanks"; they are useful study, but I have heard God's voice in plain English with over 100 volumes, and it speaks about the reality of life and the illusion of death, not just "one life after death and a 'savior' that will take away your responsibility", which is the most irreligious sentiment that I have ever heard. God will forgive those mistakes made in ignorance, but do you think that God's forgiveness can excuse you from seeking out the real truth which is at all times being spoken to everyone and even being recorded?

How are you going to recognize the truth without both a reference point and a search?
See The Problem of the Criterion from Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy

One of the very important things that the Bible tells us in this regard is, the devil makes himself look like an angel of light. 2 Corinthians 11:14:

And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light.

So, who did you hear when you thought you heard God talking those more than 100 volumes in English?

If I was Satan, and if I wanted to deceive the people, I would write the Bible and pretend to be God and claim that it was written under divine influence.  Then I'd have a couple billion Christians thinking that they're preaching the word of God as written in the Bible, when in reality it's the influence of Satan.

Wouldn't that be a trip -- to think that, all this time, you've been believing you're preaching the word of God like a good Christian, and maybe you're just a Satanist?

Or what if God is a billion more times powerful than He is, and has set this whole universe up as a complete game, to make us all think that He is a good Guy, and that He is here to help us. But all the time He simply wants to torture us like some mean child who pokes at a gerbil in its cage with a stick.

We are so absolutely weak and limited that all we can do is trust and hope. We can barely interact with the things of life in our personal situations. Even though most of us have pleasure and joy right along with the pain and sadness of life, we don't really have any control. We all die. If there are any who are, say, a thousand years old, they are of childhood age with regard to the age of the universe.

The best we can do is understand our weakness, live life in enjoyment (not heavy pleasure) because it is all we get out of life, and trust that God is good because of the goodness that we see around us and that penetrates into our souls, and do good as we see fit in our lives.

What else is there? The deep mysteries of this complex universe are hidden from us.

[Decksperiment]

AzIz.. AZIZ..LIGHT's!!!

[Lauda]

The more the thread progresses, the worse their answers become.
I always saw religion as a way to manipulate the 'sheep' population, nothing more nothing less.

[Vod]

Let's look to the Mayans.

The survived the big flood that was supposed to have killed everything on the planet.
They had better knowledge of astronomy than any other culture in the world.
They had the most advanced numbering system in the world.

They were never touched by the word of the christian god until they were destroyed by the invasion of religious fools.

[bl4kjaguar]

The big flood that was supposed to have killed everything on the planet.

Why doesn't the Bible talk about Atlantis and Lemuria? And why does mainstream science ALSO ignore this?

Food for thought. 

[vokain]

Get a copy of the Bible in your native language. Get as modern of a translation as you can, one that emulates the language that you use. Read the Gospels, the first 4 books of the New Testament: Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Then read Genesis, the first book of the Old Testament. Then read the whole New Testament except the Revelation.

Get all of the above firmly set in your mind. Then read the whole Bible over several times, reading the Gospels more frequently.

This chart will compare the difference between the Minority Text (which are based upon mainly 2 corrupted New Testament manuscripts) and the Majority Text (which are based upon over 5,000 New Testament manuscripts).
For this study, the King James Version (KJV) New Testament will be used, since the KJV is based upon the Majority Text, and all bibles that use the Majority Text are relevant to these readings. The KJV will be compared to the New International Version (NIV) New Testament, since the NIV is based upon the Minority Text, and almost all bibles published since 1898 are relevant to these readings because they are based upon these same corrupted manuscripts.

=====================

The big flood that was supposed to have killed everything on the planet.

Why doesn't the Bible talk about Atlantis and Lemuria? And why does mainstream science ALSO ignore this?

Food for thought.  

Why do you think it doesn't (re: Atlantis, at least)?

[BADecker]

The big flood that was supposed to have killed everything on the planet.

Why doesn't the Bible talk about Atlantis and Lemuria? And why does mainstream science ALSO ignore this?

Food for thought. 

Atlantis = pre-flood, worldwide population. Lemuria = science fiction. 

[Vod]

Why doesn't the Bible talk about Atlantis and Lemuria? And why does mainstream science ALSO ignore this?

Food for thought. 

For the same reason mainstream science doesn't go looking for Hansel and Gretel.  For the same reason we don't look to the sky for giant beanstocks....

[bl4kjaguar]

Why doesn't the Bible talk about Atlantis and Lemuria? And why does mainstream science ALSO ignore this?

Food for thought.  

For the same reason mainstream science doesn't go looking for Hansel and Gretel.  For the same reason we don't look to the sky for giant beanstocks....

Your rhetoric: how does it stand up to the evidence?
Will you be the first to propose a reasonable explanation for the AECES top 40?
What about the phrase from Socrates/Plato that mentions "you remember a single deluge only, but there were many previous ones"; how can that be explained?
So Plato was repeating to us a myth as though it were a fact?
Nowadays, science is validating certain elements of the ancient "myths" left and right! If you think that ancient stories cannot help explain modern mysteries then you should propose an answer for Triton's retrograde orbit, and you may as well explain the evidence for the soul and the mechanism of creation while you are at it.
So I am here to tell you: it is very instructive to read Spencer and understand his point that there is a kernel of truth in everything.
Will you do the reading to find out where science and religion truly meet?

the disagreements between [Science and Religion] have been consequences of their incompleteness; and as they reach their final forms they come into harmony.

Your assertions about science: How do they stand up to the true nature of that system?

Science has yet to justify its religious propositions about Space, Time, Matter, Motion, and Force (see Spencer's First Principles).

There are even religious propositions in mathematics:

Gödel wrote the following reply to Russell’s assertion in his autobiography, “Gödel turned out to be an unadulterated Platonist, and apparently believed that an eternal ‘not’ was laid up in heaven, where virtuous logicians might hope to meet it hereafter.”

Concerning my “unadulterated” Platonism, it is no more “unadulterated” than Russel’s own in 1921 when in the Introduction [to Mathematical Philosophy, 1919, p. 169] he said “[Logic is concerned with the real world just as truly as zoology, though with its more abstract and general features.]” At that time evidently Russell had met the “not’ even in this world, but later on under the influence of Wittgenstein he chose to overlook it. [112]

http://kevincarmody.com/math/goedel.html

the beliefs which Science has forced upon Religion, have been intrinsically more religious than those which they supplanted.

http://www.constitution.org/hs/first_prin.htm

[misterpressman]

God exists? The complexity of our planet who demonstrate a thorough tectonic, who not only created this Universe, but also continue to maintain it until today ...

So you do not believe in God?

[Vod]

This one is too funny not to post it here!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j8ZF_R_j0OY

FUCK ME IN THE ASS CAUSE I LOVE JESUS!
THE GOOD LORD WOULD WANT IT THAT WAY.....

Everyone knows it's the sex that god can't see!

 

[My Name Was Taken]

Using your own argument, that would mean that 'god the father' could not exist since he would first need to make the universe and then his son (to be a father). Regardless, I can equally assert that spaghetti exists only because the FSM created it in his own image, the same way christians insist they are created in god's image. No more contradiction. Bottom line is, that when it comes to god, there's no (scientific) way to (prove or) disprove it's existance, regardless of which god(s) your are talking about, which is the whole premise behind Russell's teapot. (Just for sake of argument, you cannot view the entire solar system through the Hubble telescope at once, nevermind a teapot god that may wish to remain undiscovered.)

With all due respect, this discussion only digressed somewhat to semantics since you were implying these terms mean something they do not. I am not arbitrarily saying anything and have already linked sources to the validity my assertions. If you insist you can arbitrarily give words their meanings, then I suppose I have nothing left say.

I'm hardly arbitrarily giving words meaning when I quote the definition of 'god' from a dictionary reference and then apply that definition in context.  But, then again, I'm not attempting to prove the existence of God, I'm simply arguing that the FSM is a bad analogy.  It's a bad analogy specifically because analogies only work if the characteristics of the things being compared are similar.

Am I missing the point of the analogy? I thought these things were always brought up in the same abstract vein; that is, you can't prove god exists any more than you can disprove there is a teapot/FSM/whatever-else. The analogy isn't about which mythical creature exists or what properties and powers it may or may not have, it's about the existence of mythical creatures period. From this view, I think the analogy is fine.

It's not fine because god is not a 'creature.'  Again, the problem with the analogy is that it tries to back a theist into a corner that doesn't exist by assuming that empiricism is the only means by which you can prove the existence of God when what we're really exploring is a totally abstract concept.  It simply doesn't work.  Imagine if I likened, for example, the abstract laws of mathematics to a "mythical creature" or the FSM or a space teapot.  Would you let me get away with such an analogy?

FSM or the 'Teapot' aren't creatures either. They're gods. Analogy seems find to me.

[bl4kjaguar]

The big flood that was supposed to have killed everything on the planet.

Why doesn't the Bible talk about Atlantis and Lemuria? And why does mainstream science ALSO ignore this?

Food for thought.  

Why do you think it doesn't (re: Atlantis, at least)?

The Hebrews remember a single deluge only, but there were many previous ones.

In this book you will find information about the huge towers in the Korean Sea discovered in 1998; underwater footage of the same was televised in April to an amazed viewing audience. Sadly, conventional scholars showed no such enthusiasm for a discovery that threatened to demolish their precoinceived notions of prehistory.
http://books.google.com/books?id=9tCybZagbqkC&pg=PA304&lpg=PA304&dq=lemuria+laser+sonar&source=bl&ots=kOZNJZQLAZ&sig=mMfCsp8J_lKDoivY98GXUL8NCBk&hl=en&sa=X&ei=1RJZVO2wEYOmyATy-YJw&ved=0CCwQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=lemuria%20laser%20sonar&f=false

[bl4kjaguar]

Sodomy

 

Hey, that is not what this thread is about.