Dear Atheists: I will prove to you that there is a Creator to the universe. Come debate me.

originally posted by: Boniouk06
I believe in a God but only because my work in quantum physics leads me into believing that.

What is it about quantum physics that led you into believing there is such a thing as a god type creature/entity?

originally posted by: Boniouk06
I believe in a God but only because my work in quantum physics leads me into believing that.

What is your work and what leads you to this conclusion?

originally posted by: GetHyped

originally posted by: Boniouk06
I believe in a God but only because my work in quantum physics leads me into believing that.

What is your work and what leads you to this conclusion?

Lol by "his work in quantum physics" I'm sure he means "3 creationist YouTube videos".

The bible has some interesting words to ponder.

Psalms 10: 3-4

The wicked are windbags,
    the swindlers have foul breath.
The wicked snub God,
    their noses stuck high in the air.
Their graffiti are scrawled on the walls:
    “Catch us if you can!” “God is dead.”

Psalms 10:13

Why does the wicked man reject God? He says to himself, "You will not hold me accountable."

 

Psalms 14:1

The [empty-headed] fool has said in his heart, There is no God.

1 Thessalonians 4:8

Therefore whoever disregards this, disregards not man but God, who gives his Holy Spirit to you.

The divine warning is clear.

a reply to: boymonkey74

I'm not wrong it was me trying to play the game of so many that ask for you to be able to do the impossible as if that further constitutes proof...

That's ok if that was lost upon you I don't expect much diff...

a reply to: 5StarOracle

Answer me this. In a natural (uncreated) universe, why would you expect there NOT to be similar patterns within matter, which is essentially made from the same basic building blocks? I figured since you pretty much ignored all other counterpoints in favor of insults, you could at the very least answer this one for me. Precisely how does this prove a creator? Patterns are not code. Thanks.

a reply to: 5StarOracle

You are wrong there are around a billion people who believe in more than one gid despite you demanding all their names.
I knew you would not admit your error.i knew you have not the balls to admit you were wrong.
Oh and continue dodging my question.
In fact don't bother why should I listen to the sheep/brainwashed? .

I will be exited to see where this will go.

a reply to: Blue_Jay33

What's that? The bible telling us to believe the bible?

Well I'm convinced!

a reply to: arimass101

just starting with your basic "which is more logical, either the universe has a creator or existed forever?" the universe doesnt need a "creator," it just needs to have been created. the two are not one and the same. outside physical forces that have yet to be discovered could have, governed by its own physical laws, created our universe. just because the universe has a beginning, does not mean that it must have a creator.

also, if the universe existed first, and has for all eternity, then god would have been a construct of something post-creation, and not the creator or prime mover in any way.

either way the question itself is illogical, and neither choice proves or disproves the existence of god. it doesnt matter what we think is or is not more logical, because neither of those choices matter to the question of the existence of god.
and no matter how many times gods existence and authority are challenged here on earth, NOTHING ever happens. this leads me to believe that either, A) we are totally misunderstanding the concept of the creator, if it even exists at all, and that it probably was, at best, the prime mover and nothing more. totally detached from human behavior, desires, instincts, survival, etc. or B) it just flat out doesnt exist

if thomas aquinas couldnt do it, i doubt you can. no offense.

a reply to: 5StarOracle

Haha, yeah I do like poking bears like you sometimes. But I really would have been sorry if I had assumed incorrectly. It's all good though, I don't feel like poking anymore. It's pointless. We'll just have to agree to disagree I guess.

Why not let it aid your journey allowing you good preparation for the next phase of existence?

I used to be a Christian but for many reasons I am not anymore. To force myself to follow something I do not believe to be the truth would just be lying to myself.

If your god exists I think he would rather me be myself instead of someone I'm not. And I would rather be myself than someone I am not. If that results in something less than enjoyable after I'm dead, so be it.

a reply to: 5StarOracle

Your avatar gives me a sense of Deja Vu, as I used to have a dear friend on another forum with that same avatar!

Anyway, this is my humble opinion regarding the Fibonacci ratio:

Nature doesn't always follow the Fibonacci sequence, there are plenty of flowers out there with non Fibonacci numbers, for example: Link to article

Also shells and galaxies follow another type of pattern called Logarithmic spirals which could look very similar to the Fibonacci one, but it's not the same: LINK to article

The Fibonacci ratio also doesn't apply to the bones in our hands (as some say): LINK

The Fibonacci is not a universal constant to be considered a code from God or something like that. I am not an expert but I believe there are other universal constants that could be more 'divine', if we can call it that, for example the speed of light and gravity (gravitational constant)... these are definitely present everywhere.

But my question is: if the Fibonacci ratio proves to some that God exists, does this mean that when the ratio is not present, its absence is proof of God not existing?

a reply to: Agartha

And even if the sequence WAS in "everything" it still is not actually evidence that god exists - it is evidence of how nature works and says nothing about it's creator, if there is any!

a reply to: Blue_Jay33

I always thought it interesting how Christians use scripture about unbelievers to strengthen their beliefs, and sometimes absurd anti-scientific views.

Not saying you're doing that necessarily, just making an observation.

originally posted by: 5StarOracle
a reply to: WakeUpBeer


I can't believe the long winded stupidity that prevails on this site now...

so stop writing it!!

originally posted by: Aloysius the Gaul
a reply to: Agartha

And even if the sequence WAS in "everything" it still is not actually evidence that god exists - it is evidence of how nature works and says nothing about it's creator, if there is any!

I also believe so, these patterns were created for optimal growth, survival.

But I am an Agnostic, which means I am open to the possibility of God existing, although I am becoming more and more skeptical as I grow older because most things seem to have a natural explanation.

originally posted by: arimass101
Over the years I came to the conclusion that the knowledge that there exists a creator to the world (with all the details below. Scroll down to see what I mean) is extremely simple and any thinking human whose brain is functioning normally will come to that very conclusion.

The obvious question is why does such a large quantity of people in the world, so many people of all generations among them genius minds of big scientists and philosophers deny that fact?

The answer is bias. A persons intellect is distorted by his desires, preconceived notions, and society. The knowledge that there exists a creator to the world threatens a persons comfort and desires because if there is a creator then he must a purpose for his creation, which might include things required of a person that threatens his comfort. A person does not like to do things that are uncomfortable to him, refrain for doing as he pleases, or be looked upon as unusual from his society. So a person tries to find all kinds of things illogical as they may be to rely upon so he can have a clear conscious while continuing to do as he desires. Many people don't even think for themselves they just blindly follow the herd of people of who are influenced by those big bias leaders of thought. Only an unbiased person who's only purpose is to find the truth no matter how uncomfortable it may be can see the clear truth that shouts itself out to the world.

Now this this knowledge is best found by contemplating to root question which is the following and nothing else. All other subjects such as morality, religion, and so forth can only be discussed after this root question is answered: Either the universe had a creator or the universe had always existed. Which is more logical? This question will lead the truly unbiased person to the inevitable truth of the existence of a creator with the following conclusions:


There exists a being, who is the master of everything that exists and who brought all things into being at the time he desired. He sustains them as long as he so desires, and rules over them with complete authority. This Being is perfect in every way, having absolutely no imperfection whatsoever. He does not depend on anything else, and is not affected by anything whatsoever.

Gods existence is absolutely without beginning or end. That is, He did not pass from nonexistence into existence, and will absolutely never pass into nonexistence. He therefore always was, and always will be, and it is impossible for him to cease to exist.

God is the cause of all that is, but He himself is not the result of any cause. Rather, His existence is necessary, intrinsic to his nature. He has absolutely no structure, nor does He have any element of multiplicity. Rather, He is structureless and ultimately simple. Nothing that applies to the physical relates to God at all. He is divorced from any boundary or limit, from every association, and from every natural law.

The true essence and nature of God cannot be grasped at all. It has no analogy, neither with any concept that exists among created things, nor with any idea that the imagination can conceive or the intellect comprehend. There are no words or descriptions which are truly fitting and proper to use in relation to God.

When we speak of God, we make use of words, but we do so only in borrowed or metaphorical terms, so that we should understand what we must regarding Him. Our vocabulary contains only words pertaining to natural concepts, bound by the limitations of created things, and it it
therefore impossible for us to say anything at all without these words. But all who seek God and speak about Him must clearly realize that any descriptions or words used in relation to God do not truly relate to Him. They can apply only as borrowed terms, and in no other sense.

Lets together debate the existence of god from the the question that I wrote above: "Either the universe had a creator or the universe had always existed. Which is more logical?"

Edit/Update:

let me expand a bit more on the question from one of my replies:

How could something physical and limited exist without there being a cause for its existence? Yet how could there be a god if no body created him? Both dont make a lot of sense but you have to agree that these are the only two possibilities. What makes more sense? Limited quantity of existence that always existed without anything limiting its quantity of existence, existing without anything making it exist, and eventually developing and changing itself from simple into being more complex or that there exists an unlimited creator whose above any physicality and time who brought limited existence from non existence and makes the entire creation exist?

Shall we begin?

Intelligence, not because you know everything but that you question everything you think you know . Be careful making such statements, people here will ''eat you alive''

a reply to: arimass101

I always felt that a miniscule human like me trying to comprehend God is like a fly crawling on the Sistine Chapel and trying to comprehend the totality of the mural with its little fly brain. I do believe in some sort of ultimate consciousness thats responsible for the existence of reality. But since we are ourselves immersed in that reality, I am not sure if we'll ever be able to understand it. Sort of like trying to look at the inside of your own eyes.

originally posted by: Agartha

originally posted by: Aloysius the Gaul
a reply to: Agartha

And even if the sequence WAS in "everything" it still is not actually evidence that god exists - it is evidence of how nature works and says nothing about it's creator, if there is any!

I also believe so, these patterns were created for optimal growth, survival.

not sure about "created" - but I am quiet happy that they are necessary.

some people think it "a miracle" that this universe exists at all - it couldn't do so if various constants and characteristics were different by the smallest amount....

but what they ignore is that this exactitude is a NECESSARY condition for this universe - if those values weer different we would not exist to contemplate the difference!

a reply to: arimass101

I'm suing you for false advertisement.

I was promised proof, to which I have yet to see any.