Is there any proof God exists?

Post Reply New Topic

Is there any proof that god exists? If so then where is it? Why does he hide from humanity let alone not do anything about the horrible things going on in the world? If he did exist everything would be perfect and people wouldn't blow themselves up for false promises of 72 virgins in a make believe land known as heaven! Why do religious believers scowl at science and religion? Is it because it goes against their beliefs even though most of their findings are facts? I am pretty sure there is no proof a mythological being exists because its kinda hard to disprove something that doesn't exist in the first place so that loop hole has been corked right then and there!

There is no proof that god exist as he is just a figure to either used to control people or to explain something that they lacked knowledge of.

What do you mean by "proof"? If you're talking strictly empirical proof, then there's no proof that YOU exist. There's EVIDENCE you exist, but evidence is not proof.

There are logical proofs, however, and they are "proof" in the same or similar sense that there are mathematical "proofs" for things.

Empiricist arguments fall flat because they usually aren't very convincing. They are taken from the circular argument that, roughly, the material world is all that exists, therefore there is no God. It's circular because the material world is also something that demands proof, and yet in order to prove a material world you have to assume there is a material world to prove. To show evidence of a material world, you have to observe the material world, which you do through the senses. But the senses are part of that world, and therefore there's no non-circular reasoning that such a world actually exists.

To the Christian, God is easily explained as transcendent, thus there is no need to prove that God exists. That God exists is axiomatic to our faith. So if we are able to reasonably conclude that there IS a God, there's no point in trying to prove what we already know.

In other words, you don't have to convince a believer that God exists.

You DO, however, have to convince a believer that God DOESN'T exist. So my question is this: Is there any proof that God does NOT exist?

Of course there IS PROOF GOD EXISTS.

God is Mother Nature True.

GOD IS above, so below, inside, and outside of YOU.

Cannot you see IT, ALL THAT IS GOD AS MOTHER NATURE TRUE...

But anyway, at least that's what the dude Jesus says, as reported in the Gnostic Gospel of Thomas, per similar metaphor.

It's a shame so many folks take it so far out of context; yes, I agree on that part.

But let's face it SOME fundamentalist leaning folks SIMPLY CANNOT AND DO NOT UNDERSTAND METAPHOR, to a greater extent.

And THAT has resulted in much unneeded human suffering throughout the ages of FAKE CONTRIVED TRIBAL GODS.

BUT AT least some truth is contained in the myths that DO survive.

Myths commonly house the essence of truth in the vehicles and vessels that are often religions.

To discern TRUTH IN METAPHOR, is A skill that CAN be the difference between life or death, in historical terms, for sure.

But anyway, I do not want to leave without providing the evidence of where who said what Jesus said goes around the roundtable of oral tradition that can change everyday, WHEN his name was Yeshua or whatever, back in the day, 2K years ago, or so...

But again, never the less, TRUTH CAN BE TRUTH in myth OR RELIGION, when discerned appropriately, as such, EVEN IN THE strangest of metaphors discerned truthfully as such.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/chr/thomas.htm

I believe he exists, that is enough for me (had several traumatic experiences in the past and cannot come to any other conclusion, plus I was raised Catholic and still am). If people don't believe that's fine, I won't judge them for it. As long as your belief doesn't hurt others, then feel free to believer whatever you want.

How does one define a god? For example, if I would to make a simulation of thing would I not be the god of that simulation. As we are all just a bunch of biological functions that will response in a certain way to a certain stimuli. Hence, if this universe is a simulation then the being that created this simulation could be a god. However, this leads to another problem as if we could create a simulation then is the thing that created us just a simulation. Then at what point is reality as any universe could be just a model of another.

Anyways, the way humanity define god is not real as it is just a fair tale to explain or control. As one can pick apart many religions as one just needs one error of "god's word" to disprove all of it.

It depends on your standards of proof.

If you're an empiricist, then there is no proof, since empiricism requires consistently repeatable demonstrations of principles unique to God. Miracles on demand, for example; say a certain prayer the same way each time, and another person is resurrected or has a lost limb regenerated. Since this does not happen, then there is norepeatable demonstration, so there is no evidence for the existence of God.

If you're a believer, then any coincident event, whether repeatable or not, would be sufficient proof.

But if you're a true believer, then you need no proof at all, because belief itself is all of the proof that you need. To a True Believer, you can't believe in something if it doesn't exist, so it exists if you believe in it (an empiricist would call this "circular logic" or "self-referential proof", and dismiss it as proof due to logical being a logical fallacy).

An atheist would likely dismiss the question entirely, as it pre-supposes the existence of God before the proof is presented.

^^^^
What he said

In a word... nope.
Oops.. sorry, nope isn't a word. Nope doesn't exist.
So I was using something that doesn't exist to argue something that doesn't exist.
I guess that's because we don't need nothin' to know the answer.

lol

Well, words and symbols are abstractions and as such are immaterial. If you allow for abstract concepts in existence, then you have to allow at least the possibility for other such things as well.

You gotta walk before you can run.

Lets start with "evidence" before we talk about "proof".

Even the religious admit that God is "elusive". That's why belief in God is called "faith".

Well said.

All reasoning is eventually circular, so a personal conviction one way or another relies on presuppositions.

Also, never once in the Bible was it ever said that God's presence was undeniable for everyone. God was physically manifested during the Exodus and people persisted in arguing over God's will, disobeying commandments, etc. God chooses not to force belief but lets us make up our own minds. I think even if we could call God down in such a way that his presence was incontrovertible, no single dedicated atheist would for a moment believe it. If you don't want God, you get no God.

"A god that does not manifest itself in reality is indistinguishable from a god that does not exist"

- Matt Dillahunty

I'll believe it when I see it, which is kind of ironic since Christianity is all about "faith" and believing without evidence... Then again, if there is a god, I highly doubt it's Yahweh. It's probably a pantheon of some long-forgotten pagan gods.

Well, that's just it. If the Bible is correct, and I believe it is, then people HAVE seen God, or at the very least some representation of God. They've been present when there was evidence and STILL didn't believe. I'm of the opinion that those who pay lip service to believing when they see it most likely won't.

To take a more materialist look at it, you can come up with all sorts of evidence for all sorts of things. There's tons of evidence for a geocentric view of our solar system. That doesn't magically make the geocentric view the correct one.

Essentially, "no evidence, therefore no God" is a false dichotomy. Carl Sagan wasn't a believer, either, but even he would say "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence."

I also dispute that Christian faith is predicated on blind faith alone. I think the evidence for our beliefs was documented and it is up to us to decide whether we find the evidence credible or not. I happen to not take issue with it. Not everyone is going to share my view.

No.

Think of it: if there were actual evidence of the existence of a deity, he/she/it would then be just another part of the natural world, for scientists to study and analyze. Doesn't sound very divine.

All religious belief is faith: belief despite the absence of evidence.