The Real Scientific proof of GOD

Originally posted by Nobama
reply to post by Chinesis

 

Is EVERYTHING explainable via "Science?" No? Why Not?

wut? your telling me that science can't explain everything??? really?

Then: explain everything: now....


By the way, it's YOU'RE, not your.

You're = you are.

reply to post by Chinesis


I was using attack loosely, and why must someone have beliefs, maybe I just live my life as it should be, and not worry about being judged for what I have done during that time? Your pretty good at twisting around words to make yourself seem smart, when in reality your simply beating around the bush.

oh and as for your quote below lol dude 1+ for that one.

Darkness is light we cannot see. But it is light nonetheless.

reply to post by Chinesis


btw we're on a forum where even though a word is spelled differently it still sounds the same and thus doesn't have to be spelled the correct way lol. oh and explain Gods existence to me right now without using the bible.

Originally posted by Nobama
reply to post by Chinesis

 

I was using attack loosely, and why must someone have beliefs, maybe I just live my life as it should be, and not worry about being judged for what I have done during that time? Your pretty good at twisting around words to make yourself seem smart, when in reality your simply beating around the bush.

oh and as for your quote below lol dude 1+ for that one.

Darkness is light we cannot see. But it is light nonetheless.

Hey, it you want to pussy foot around the BOLD claims you've made without offering ANY proof,
then it stands to reason you can't.

If you don't believe in anything, then why not say so?
Why be so butt-hurt about it? Why do you take things so personal?

Why are you so angry? If I don't understand you: then explain it to me!

If not? Your choice. You just paint yourself to be so narrow minded and all knowing without
providing not a single droplet of explanation that warrants posting. Why is that?


Is there such thing as "Cold." ???

reply to post by Chinesis


You make no sense whatsoever dude. whose angry? and dont ignore the quote come on explain that one to me.

Originally posted by Nobama
reply to post by Chinesis

 

btw we're on a forum where even though a word is spelled differently it is still the same word and thus doesn't have to be spelled the correct way lol. oh and explain Gods existence to me right now without using the bible.

edit on 7-4-2011 by Nobama because: (no reason given)

Exactly, you can't prove # so you have to repeat *like a parrot* a question I've already answered.
Why is that? Does it make you feel better?

Reading comp, bro. Brush up on it.

Anyway, because *I* have no ego (as you do) here:

I cannot explain God's existence because I have no proof God does exist.
I cannot explain God's existence because I have no proof God does exist
I cannot explain God's existence because I have no proof God does exist
I cannot explain God's existence because I have no proof God does exist

Would you like it posted again, lol!!!

I believe that there is a Creator.
I believe that there is a Creator.
I believe that there is a Creator. (Without proof there is)


While you believe in nothing, because nothing needs no explanation: it's the safe hand to play. Isn't it?

reply to post by Chinesis


No it's the smarter hand to play, you have no proof there's a god yet you believe in a creator and yet im the narrow minded one? huh?

Originally posted by Nobama
reply to post by Chinesis

 

No it's the smarter hand to play, you have no proof there's a god yet you believe in a creator and yet im the narrow minded one? huh?

Man, I'm so sad for you.

See: narrow minded is you: Why? You believe in nothing because there is no proof (human proof that you can read about) Suffice to say you read about Science, and have them do all the leg work because YOU fail at calculation, and equations which would prove otherwise your position as a copy and paste internet soldier regurgitating information like a mother bird tending to her newborn babies.

How an I open minded?
I don't limit myself to just what I believe.
I don't read what intelligent Scientific pioneers wrote about and accept it blindly (as you do)

This ^^^ fact alone makes me open minded.
You are a carbon cutout of many replicas. -Zero creative/original thought.

In fact there is no proof you possess creativity/ingenuity/original/free thinking intellect.

It's proven for all to see within each sad new post you reply to mine!


Since I was actually waiting for you to come with some good points of discussion
(instead of a sad attempt at humour via ad homnimen attack and smart-astic undertones)

I am going to leave.
Please, feel free to talk to yourself and have the last word.

reply to post by Chinesis


I believe in the Universe and that if it wasn't for religion we could very well be taking vacations to Mars, see Religion has and who knows probably will always slow down our advancement as a intelligent race...we can go on for hours about this silly subject, but honestly what would that achieve?

oh i'd like to add I didn't read past your first sentence in your last post.

People please stop going offtopic and stop flaming each other and actually read, think and think again.
I am seeing many posting without thought. I was busy all day and now I will try and post as many replies as I can. But if I see the flame and offtopic posts continue I will abandon the topic.

First, what you stated are not "facts" nor scientific proof.

The entire concept of god is paradoxical, i.e., omnipotent and omniscient and one that has no beginning or end: it can't be proven or dis-proven.

It really is a concept developed by a genius, if you ask me, since his paradox has stayed true for thousands of years, and still has people following it and arguing it as truth. It's funny, and a little sad, that people can be so gullible when looking for answers and comfort in such a harsh world with so many questions.

The problem with this concept is no one has any evidence of such a thing except for word of mouth and some desert scribblings....tell me how reliable both of those things are when you factor in that it is human nature to lie and make things up....not very..

I dont know if anyone has said this yet but, this is pretty much what you call "pantheism'.Any way good post especially being that I am a pantheist

Originally posted by Thill

Originally posted by kaleshchand

The fourth quality. God is all knowing. Since the universe is "everything" it will mean that only the universe can know about everything, thus it is all knowing, and so is God.

Conclusion, the Universe is God, where universe is defined as "All matter and energy that there is". This definition is here for future proofing, so that it will automatically include multiverses, parallel universes, or any other universes that are discovered.

Nice post with interesting conclusion , but I have to disagree with conclusion 4. The universe is not all knowing , it only contains all the information , but in order for it to be all knowing it would have to be conscious, self aware and intelligent , which it is not . It is like saying that the computer chassis that holds all the components of your PC is super smart , because it has access to the internet . No it is not super smart , it only has access to the information but on its own it is just a piece of metal with wires

Now don't get me wrong , this is a very good definition and I would tend to agree that the universe (at least to us) is somewhat a God since it did create us and our life cycle is determined by its boundaries and laws (at least for now

) . But this is not the type of God that religion is trying to prove , which would be a conscious, self aware , super intelligent being that is consciously controlling the uni/multi verse.

Lets see, A computer can be isolated from the internet and can be disconnected. But nothing can be isolated from the universe, and that is why it knows but the computer does not. Similar to this is a human, all knowlege of a human is contained within the brain, but the human knows, we don't say the brain knows, because the brain has no way of expressing itself if a person is not attached to it. in a similar way what every living thing knows, the universe knows.

And about religion, well it depends, which religion you are talking about, that is why I used the definition which to my experience would hold valid in most religions.

Originally posted by marsend
Deities, help keep the masses amused, I have never understood why man is the only one that prostrates itself before a deity, one would think, that animals would have it hard wired to also do this. Maths is maths, religion is religion, neither are two useful for getting a cow out of the bog.

Yes Deities help keep masses amused, but I am not trying to prove or say anything about a deity.

Originally posted by Arbitrageur

Originally posted by Thill
Nice post with interesting conclusion , but I have to disagree with conclusion 4. The universe is not all knowing , it only contains all the information , but in order for it to be all knowing it would have to be conscious, self aware and intelligent , which it is not . It is like saying that the computer chassis that holds all the components of your PC is super smart , because it has access to the internet . No it is not super smart , it only has access to the information but on its own it is just a piece of metal with wires

Good remarks about #4, I was thinking the same thing before I read your post. That's probably the biggest problem.

see this post

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
But #1 is also a problem. Matter and energy aren't created or destroyed according to current physical laws, so that might apply up to about 13.6 billion years ago, but what about before that? Can you say the universe had no beginning? Was there no big bang? The scientific consensus is that there probably was a big bang, which is a beginning, is it not?

Also remember I am defining the universe as "all that there is". That is simply because I am not comfortable using the term multiverse in this forum. So the big bang could hove happened within another universe/multiverse, which would still be considered with this definition.

Also there have been reports of "cycles" of big bang being found in the cosmic background, so there.

Here are some links.
link 1
Link 2
link 3

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
So if God has no beginning and our current universe began at the big bang then our current universe isn't God.

see above.

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
2 and 3 I don't really have as big a problem with, though I think the term "power" or "powerful" needs to be examined in context and not in isolation. In my interpretation at least, the "power" of God would be a directed kind of power to purposefully make things happen according to the consciousness we discussed regarding item

The power is used in a similar sense that you have power over your body, the universe/God has power over everything.

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
4. While the universe seems to have nearly endless power, I'm not sure that it's necessarily like the power that God is claimed to have used to part the red sea, is it?

Are we sure we are talking about the same God? also see above.

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer

Originally posted by IAMIAM
Why rethink it?

Because it doesn't rule out energy sources that are directly attributable to human or natural sources.

Also, pretending the the universe and its functions are god does not make the universe and its functions god.

If a bowl of liquid has the generally accepted qualities of a bowl of water I will call it a bowl of water, if the universe/multiverse has the generally accepted qualities of God I will call it God.

Or, on a more basic level, if this entity is all encompassing, why does it do anything? What is its motivation? Action implies need, need implies deficiency. Why perform a test when you already know the result?

There's something very wrong with the OP's basic definition. That's always what it boils down to.


Look at it this way will you? you comprise of all the cells of your body, and thus in essence you are doing whatever your body is doing, while at the same time you are not doing anything, all your cells do the work.
In a similar way God does everything and nothing at the same time.

Interesting points in the OP. Personally, I perceive God (assuming everything there was and is started from a single entity) to be everything that there is in existence, but at the same time capable of transcending nothingness or nonexistence. I don't think such and existence directly intervenes with the material world though, and I don't have reason to believe God even requires mankind's worship, as opposed to popular religion. Perhaps such an entity is passive. If God were to be all-knowing and wise, he must be somewhat neutral. Neither completely good nor evil. Neither complete order nor chaos. Sort of like Yin & Yang. I believe so because life cannot be truly free and authentic if it were all about happiness and bliss, and vice-versa. Life is about pain and suffering, as much as it is joy and happiness. So surely such an entity would be well aware of the basics of life, and the consequences of intervention that can shift the balance. Mind that the earth is but a tiny speck of dust within a grand uni/multiverse. God could be anything within or beyond this.

Given these parameters, I reckon it would be very difficult to comprehend such an existence within the current boundaries of the human mind. Perhaps as we further evolve and develop the mind, spirit and body, in time we would be able to paint a more accurate picture of such a being. We should try to understand more about our own existence first, and then the cosmos itself. Not just scientifically, but also spiritually, and heck maybe even through poetry (since I believe man can evoke infinite forms of expression through it). Sadly, the way things are going around the world, I have a feeling there won't be any significant progress any time soon. So I guess it all just comes down to faith again, whether or not you believe, since there can be no definite scientific proof at this point in time, though there may be hints of God here and there, IMHO.

As quoted from Waking Life: "When you come to think of it, almost all human behavior and activity is not essentially any different from animal behavior. The most advanced technologies and craftsmanship bring us, at best, up to the super-chimpanzee level. Actually, the gap between, say, Plato or Nietzsche and the average human is greater than the gap between that chimpanzee and the average human. The realm of the real spirit, the true artist, the saint, the philosopher, is rarely achieved."

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer

Originally posted by kaleshchand
Definition of God
Lets face it, we cant prove/disprove something that has an unlimited number of definitions. So for this thread God will be defined by "generally accepted" qualities of God. So what are the qualities of God?

1. God has no beginning or end. (i.e. God was never "born" and can never die)
   
2. God is everywhere.
   
3. God is all powerful.
   
4. God is all knowing.
   

What exactly validates these qualities of the alleged "god"? How do you know these qualities fit the definition of a god and are not, say, just some arbitrary qualities you made up?

Could I not do the same thing? I could, for example, define god as a cylinder of wood with graphite at its center. Then I could look for something fitting this definition, say... a pencil, and simply call it god.

That is the basic defenition most religions use for God or God of Gods, you may do your pencil stuff but then most religions don't, I am trying to define God , so I will need to take a balance of most religions.