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

originally posted by: rickymouse
Hmmm. I believe there is a being that is referred to as god, but I don't see any evidence presented that even starts to prove he exists. Oh well.

Obviously discounting your own existence as proof; the "HEY THERE HUMAN" what for art thou and reason for being; incredible creature (all by yourself created your own being).

originally posted by: arimass101

If the concept of a divine being was logical, it would be one of the hypotheses considered by scientists.

Your exactly the person I was referring to when I wrote:

A persons intellect is distorted by his desires, preconceived notions, and society.

and

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.

If I blindly followed the herd, I'd be a Christian. I was raised as a Christian and went to a Christian school where brainwashing was part of the curriculum.

Thanks for the condescending attitude.

a reply to: Cuervo

I said the contemplation on the question will lead you to the answer. Contemplate, share, and lets debate it.

Why does me not believing in a creator, upset you to where you feel the need to prove to me that there is a creator?

Either the universe had a creator or the universe had always existed. Which is more logical?"

I see this as pretty narrow minded.

My own personal opinion on the matter is that I believe that the universe is in constant motion.I think the universe recycles itself. There is no ending and there is no begining. The one true perpetual motion.

Always been here, nah it just. changes form and structure.

But I'm not really here to debate, I found that there are a certain type of people who "know the truth, and have the proof", I find these types of people are the equivalent of talking to a brick wall.

I have my opinions on the matter and I can change my outlook, or outcome as new "evidence" comes to fruition.

Can you?

a reply to: arimass101

I just wanted to add that I don't think it's important that you can't prove it.

I personally believe in a divine origin behind our reality but I understand this as my truth and I don't require anyone to prove her existence to me. It is true whether or not I prove it to others.

I just think it's strange how so many religious people find it so important to prove their gods to people. Atheists don't try to prove the non-existence of them because they know they can't and they also know it doesn't matter.

Until we have some major breakthroughs in our understanding of physics (quantum and otherwise), it's a pointless debate.

originally posted by: arimass101
a reply to: Cuervo

I said the contemplation on the question will lead you to the answer. Contemplate, share, and lets debate it.

If god is all you can come up with when you contemplate the question, I'd say you're giving up way too easily.

The answer to your question is both. There is both a creator and the universe has always existed. Maybe this current version of the universe hasn't always existed, but it has existed in one form or another for eternity already.

The law of thermodynamics and the conservation of energy is proof of the concept that the universe has always existed. Energy cannot be created nor destroyed and EVERYTHING is energy on a base level, in one form or another. The body you inhabit right now? It has always existed in one form or another. At one point in the distant past it was part of the inside of a star and even that star had its roots in yet another star before it.

The creator is also the creation. Fractals show the same pattern at every level infinitely, the universe is an infinitely complex fractal and the creator at the top is the same as the creation at the bottom. As above, so below; as within, so without.

The creation is a mirror image of the creator. The creator is within you and you are the reflecting point between the creator and creation. You are both simultaneously.

ETA: In my opinion.

The two logic propositions are a tautological
equivalent; thus your query is semantically
null and void of content.

Sorry.

Kev

a reply to: arimass101

Sir, or ma'am what has compelled you to go about this proving rant? I'd really like to know what has possessed you, or concerned you so much you feel you must change others belief systems?

Hi there, it actually has been and is being considered by many scientists. I speak from experience. Your top scientists ARE admitting that science has proved or is pointing to a creator that must exist.There are many publishings about this. This is why I have to speak up when I hear the age old cop-out of somebody claiming that scientists don't believe. Im sure some don't, but a lot do. a reply to: Answer

Having read the Op's opening bit and the rest of the comments the following can be stated:

What the Op is stating, is that he can prove something that can not be proven and asking that we disprove that which can not be proven. There in lies the problem, as it is a paradox. One can not merely prove without viable proof, and at the same time, try and prove that which can not be, by the very definition and concept of such.

... and yet, after reading that OP, I still don't believe in the fantasies of Neolithic goat-herders.

Not to mention, there is no meaning of the word "debate" that screed incorporates.

I'd say this needs to be moved to the HOAX Bin ... the title is absolutely misleading, and the OP is BS.

/shrug

Again?

Maybe you coulda just resurrected an existing thread. Plenty to choose from.

a reply to: liejunkie01

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?

originally posted by: ChrisVH
Hi there, it actually has been and is being considered by many scientists. I speak from experience. Your top scientists ARE admitting that science has proved or is pointing to a creator that must exist.There are many publishings about this. This is why I have to speak up when I hear the age old cop-out of somebody claiming that scientists don't believe. Im sure some don't, but a lot do. a reply to: Answer

Oh?

By many scientists, you say? Our TOP scientists, even? Science has proved that a creator must exist?

Please link me to some of this published peer-reviewed research. I'm sure the information comes from respected and unbiased sources.

a reply to: sdcigarpig

You're all getting to emersed in the philosophical depth of the question
that is the core of this topic. OP wants a debate, but all he's getting
seems like the clamor of nervous horses before a tornado makes itself
known.

OP, you state over and over again that your god is a 'he'. From everything I know about nature the ruling sex is most definitely female.

originally posted by: randyvs
OP wants a debate, but all he's getting
seems like the clamor of nervous horses before a tornado makes itself
known.

That's rich.

What, exactly, is there to debate?

The OP's basic point is: "I can prove god exists because I believe in god and it makes sense to me."

Trying to debate the existence of god is an idiotic waste of time. There is zero evidence but that doesn't stop people from believing.

People your avoiding from debating me from this question: "Either the universe had a creator or the universe had always existed. Which is more logical?" This is the root of the tree. Everything else are branches. You cant have branches if you dont have a root.

a reply to: arimass101

You do realize that your concept of what God is can be applied to consciousness right? What allows anything to exist from your perspective? Your consciousness. What allows anything to exist from any perspective? Consciousness.

Consciousness is pretty illusive, it can't be observed because it is the thing that is observing. It is omnipresent because it is presence itself. It is omnipotent because it allows for anything to be thought of; consciousness is not physical so physical limitations do not apply to it. It is unlimited, it just keeps chugging along and has been for billions of years now and even before that. If life started here on Earth then it is a guarantee that it has existed before Earth and even before that as well. There is no beginning or end to consciousness, it is a steady stream of information. You cannot be aware of being unconscious.