What would it take to prove the existence of a God?

[Tormod]

Originally posted by: wisdumn
very sorry tormod for including the web site, i must admit that i didn't remember in the faq that we couldn't post from other sites

It is perfectly okay to post links as long as they are a) in context and b) follow the rules in the FAQ.

Freethinker's link is the source of the material he publishes, so it is posted for reference. You'd have spotted that if you clicked on it.

Although technically it would be better if FT added "Source:" in front of the link, but since he made it pretty obvious that he was posting material from elsewhere then that is okay.

Also, it is NOT okay to post anything from another site in ANY other case than when it is used for quoting. We had a problem a while back where people would post entire (copyrighted) articles without even crediting the owners.

So the issue is twofold:

1) If you want to post links, always explain why it is posted, or post it as reference to something you write about. Do not post the link without any comment.

2) Do not post anything from other sites without permission and credit.

Simple, eh?

[wisdumn]

i see many guests browsing, come join the fun, just register,read the FAQ, and start posting, it's lotsa' fun

[Razeroth]

A better question, I think, would be: What whould it take to disprove God?
Science would need an experiment that represented a Universe and
A. was not created
B. is not maintained
C. is not observed

If this experimental universe is at any time is observed it will emediatly prove there is a God, if it is ever maintained a God is proven, and above all if this experiment doesn't spontaniously emerge from nothing, God is fundamentaly proven. So all Science has to do is wait for this unseen, unheard, uncared for, and forever unknown universe to never show itself and it can go on saying theres no proof of God.

There is however more proof of God then there is proof that thier is not one. People who believe in God have had actual Person Expieriences that constitute proof on a Personal level. People who do not believe mererly go on a Lack of Personal Expierence and Lack of Personal Proof. That means that there are for God thousands apon millions of personal witnesses, and against God not a single witness or drop of personal experience. For how can one witness what isn't there or experience what doesn't exist? How many witnesses constituites evidence, and how much evidence constituites a proof? Can anything truely be proven indesputably?

If I awoke one morning and described to you a dream I had, would you call me liar and demand solid physical evidence that such a dream had actually occured? No, you believe that I had indeed had such a drea, no matter how unbelievable it seemed, on the standpoint that I had no reason to lie and that we all have dreams. Why do we demand proof of things that can not be proven? How do you proove to your wife that you love her? How do you prove to your children that they can trust you? How do you prove that your thoughts are your own?

God can not be the subject of experiment as he is an inteligent being. He is more then just physical forces that can be tried again and again. If God became subject to experiment he would not be God. For God tobe all powerful he would needs be forever free from our judgement and scutiny. For the creature can not sit in judgement apon the Creator, the darkness can not master the light.

God can not be disproven, to observe such a proof would prove him. Likewise he can not allow himself to be universaly proven, such would undermine the faith of so many that found him without proof, and would jeoperdize our agency in that we could no longer chose not to believe.

So chose who you will love, Truth or Lies.
And if you love Truth, speak no more of lies.
And if you love Lies, speak no more of God.

[C1ay]

Originally Posted by Razeroth

There is however more proof of God then there is proof that thier is not one.

No. There is no proof that there is a God. If you disagree please provide some testable proof.

[pgrmdave]

Razeroth - your post, while though out, is not scientific. You claim that

Originally Posted by Razeroth

There is however more proof of God then there is proof that thier is not one.

and that

Originally Posted by Razeroth

Likewise he can not allow himself to be universaly proven, such would undermine the faith of so many that found him without proof, and would jeoperdize our agency in that we could no longer chose not to believe.

So, which is it? Either there is more proof of him or he cannot have any proof.

Originally Posted by Razeroth

If I awoke one morning and described to you a dream I had, would you call me liar and demand solid physical evidence that such a dream had actually occured? No, you believe that I had indeed had such a drea, no matter how unbelievable it seemed, on the standpoint that I had no reason to lie and that we all have dreams.

But would we think that the dream was reality?

[orbsycli]

Originally Posted by C1ay

No. There is no proof that there is a God. If you disagree please provide some testable proof.

this argument will eventually lead to what they call "biblical proof"
what the hell is this? i've never understood.

[jp3089]

I believe in God, and He means a lot to me, but I can't prove him to anyone.

I'm ok with people if they don't want to believe in God, but I personally feel that my life is better with God as a major factor. This is true for me, but there's not a single way in the world to PROVE this to anyone else. What do you guys think?

-jp

[Tormod]

This thread is very old. Please start new threads instead of replying to very old topics.