Does God Exist-Yes/No Discussion

[remonray]

I read somewhere:
"If god has created humans then also they have no control over humans." because they can't make us believe 😀

And I think I don't believe in God good for me, if others doesn't believe in god bad for me so it's like I don't and wish others do believe.

 

[Nathan]

@ Evangelist,

You say to look at everything that man cannot create himself, however one must look at what 'God' (as per people's beliefs on what the name is) and one must ask the same question;
Who created 'God'?

Good luck with finding an answer that will impress me.

Nathan, firstly, why would I try to impress you with an answer about God? Contrary to your own popular beliefs, you're impressed with God without me giving you an answer... you believe there is a God, but you just don't know anything about Him.

Secondly, God didn't need anyone to create Him... this is why He is called God, because no one created Him... He created the earth and all that dwells therein... so since He is the Creator of ALL THINGS, why would He need someone to create Him?... can't get any higher than God, nor is there any other name in heaven or on earth than to be called GOD-Jehovah. His name is above all names, because He is Spirit, and is an infinte powerful being without mother or father... now, even if you SAY, you don't believe... that you know that is awesome to be GOD and of such greatness! lol

-- 03 Jun 2013, 23:17 --

Evangelist: I was replying to the question of this topic.

Sorry, I mis-read your comment...

It's ironic how people use the excuse that 'he has no reason to be created' or 'he wasn't created'.

Yet some people have this idiotic idea that humans were created by this 'God', yet we were born from our mothers, after we were conceived during sexual intercourse.

Makes no sense, like literally no sense.

Common sense, it's just not that common.

 

[Fergal]

Thanks for the explanation David L.

 

[Venom]

If there was evidence that god exists (and I mean real physical proof) then I would belive. But I havnt seen any evidence.

 

[Jerison]

If there was evidence that god exists (and I mean real physical proof) then I would belive. But I havnt seen any evidence.

This comment will just tie back to what I said.

 

[Geoffrey]

If there was physical proof, we wouldn't even be having this debate.

 

[Venom]

What I mean is, I 100% belive 'God' does not exist, Becuase I have not seen physical or scientific evidence.

 

[OiLerz284]

These debates never go anywhere.

I'm a Muslim, so I believe God does exist.


Is there proof God exists? Nothing that you can really test. But that's because God is not a scientific theory. If you believe in God, you see the proof by looking at the Earth, the universe. Every tree, every waterfall, ever creature. If you don't believe in God, then these proofs mean nothing to you.

It's simple as that, to be honest.

I remember reading this somewhere, I really liked it: We humans cannot even look directly at the sun, yet we expect to look at the One who created it.

I paraphrased it, but the meaning is still the same.


The way I see it, as it's taught in Islam, is that if God wants you to believe in Him, it will happen. That's why I don't try to convince people.

 

[vividlion]

I believe he does actually,


Cause what created the big bang!?

and also check this picture out! this flower looks like a smiling monkey! I mean I honestly don't think nature does that by coincidence XD

another eye opener was this article

 

[Jerison]

I believe he does actually,


Cause what created the big bang!?

and also check this picture out! this flower looks like a smiling monkey! I mean I honestly don't think nature does that by coincidence XD

another eye opener was this article

Even know I believe in him, this picture doesn't prove anything, could be Photoshop also, there are allot of other things in this world that looks like stuff to some people and not to other people. So that absolutely doesn't prove anything.

If anyone's goal here is to change someones prospective of what they think about this topic it isn't going to happen, there will come a time in their life's that they may need him. They only reason I believe in him is because of when my aunt died, and what I saw afterwards, that allot of people will say has nothing to do with god and is just a dream. <--- As I said before, there is no scientific proof so it's kinda hard to change someones prospective of this.

 

[JHS905]

I am a Roman Catholic, but I don't go to church. Instead, if someone is having problems or if someone related to me or close to me is hurt or in trouble, I say a small prayer to them. Don't get me wrong. I believe in God with all my heart and soul.

 

[vividlion]

I believe he does actually,


Cause what created the big bang!?

and also check this picture out! this flower looks like a smiling monkey! I mean I honestly don't think nature does that by coincidence XD

another eye opener was this article

Even know I believe in him, this picture doesn't prove anything, could be Photoshop also, there are allot of other things in this world that looks like stuff to some people and not to other people. So that absolutely doesn't prove anything.

If anyone's goal here is to change someones prospective of what they think about this topic it isn't going to happen, there will come a time in their life's that they may need him. They only reason I believe in him is because of when my aunt died, and what I saw afterwards, that allot of people will say has nothing to do with god and is just a dream. <--- As I said before, there is no scientific proof so it's kinda hard to change someones prospective of this.

I highly doubt its photoshopped if you search smiling monkey orchid there is evidence to comfirm it's real checkout this news article

 

[Jerison]

I believe he does actually,


Cause what created the big bang!?

and also check this picture out! this flower looks like a smiling monkey! I mean I honestly don't think nature does that by coincidence XD

another eye opener was this article

Even know I believe in him, this picture doesn't prove anything, could be Photoshop also, there are allot of other things in this world that looks like stuff to some people and not to other people. So that absolutely doesn't prove anything.

If anyone's goal here is to change someones prospective of what they think about this topic it isn't going to happen, there will come a time in their life's that they may need him. They only reason I believe in him is because of when my aunt died, and what I saw afterwards, that allot of people will say has nothing to do with god and is just a dream. <--- As I said before, there is no scientific proof so it's kinda hard to change someones prospective of this.

I highly doubt its photoshopped if you search smiling monkey orchid there is evidence to comfirm it's real checkout this news article

Ugh, you missed my whole point.

 

[Medora]

Not to say the flower is false, but the article linked to might not be the best source, if I correctly remember that The Sun is a tabloid. The next few sources on the first page of Google do not inspire much confidence either.

In regards to something in nature not being coincidence, a purpose for design does not necessarily require an "intelligent designer," but as some naturalists argue may be the result of "blind necessity," as driven by the mechanism of evolution. Of course, some might in turn argue that an intelligent designer put in motion the mechanism of blind necessity.

In any case, as example of how the mechanism of blind necessity may work, before a fully-developed eye might be a much less developed apparatus that allows something to see snippets of light, but this alone may provide enough of an advantage for say surviving against predators over those without the apparatus that the apparatus remains and develops for further advantage (over those with a less developed version of the apparatus), as the predator also adapts to better deal with something that has a more developed apparatus for seeing light.

Some might say that the fully-developed eye is a quite beautiful and necessarily complex apparatus, such as those men trying to court women, or vice versa. And as mentioned in the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, naturalists such as William Derham have seen the eye as an apt example of intelligent design. Less devout naturalists may see issue with the argument, pointing out such potential problems as the unnecessary backward wiring of the human eye.

Whoever is right, there is apparently much that can be said not only for intelligent design but blind design for more common but no less wondrous features of a human and the rest of nature.

 

[vividlion]

I believe he does actually,


Cause what created the big bang!?

and also check this picture out! this flower looks like a smiling monkey! I mean I honestly don't think nature does that by coincidence XD

another eye opener was this article

Even know I believe in him, this picture doesn't prove anything, could be Photoshop also, there are allot of other things in this world that looks like stuff to some people and not to other people. So that absolutely doesn't prove anything.

If anyone's goal here is to change someones prospective of what they think about this topic it isn't going to happen, there will come a time in their life's that they may need him. They only reason I believe in him is because of when my aunt died, and what I saw afterwards, that allot of people will say has nothing to do with god and is just a dream. <--- As I said before, there is no scientific proof so it's kinda hard to change someones prospective of this.

I highly doubt its photoshopped if you search smiling monkey orchid there is evidence to comfirm it's real checkout this news article

Ugh, you missed my whole point.

I'm sorry you do have a point from an atheist's point of view they wouldn't see it that way, though from someone who's researched a little and discovered a few facts would be able to see this as one of his many creations.

 

[Anorak]

Soooo many quotes 😕

 

[vividlion]

Not to say the flower is false, but the article linked to might not be the best source, if I correctly remember that The Sun is a tabloid. The next few sources on the first page of Google do not inspire much confidence either.

In regards to something in nature not being coincidence, a purpose for design does not necessarily require an "intelligent designer," but as some naturalists argue may be the result of "blind necessity," as driven by the mechanism of evolution. Of course, some might in turn argue that an intelligent designer put in motion the mechanism of blind necessity.

In any case, as example of how the mechanism of blind necessity may work, before a fully-developed eye might be a much less developed apparatus that allows something to see snippets of light, but this alone may provide enough of an advantage for say surviving against predators over those without the apparatus that the apparatus remains and develops for further advantage (over those with a less developed version of the apparatus), as the predator also adapts to better deal with something that has a more developed apparatus for seeing light.

Some might say that the fully-developed eye is a quite beautiful and necessarily complex apparatus, such as those men trying to court women, or vice versa. And as mentioned in the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, naturalists such as William Derham have seen the eye as an apt example of intelligent design. Less devout naturalists may see issue with the argument, pointing out such potential problems as the unnecessary backward wiring of the human eye.

Whoever is right, there is apparently much that can be said not only for intelligent design but blind design for more common but no less wondrous features of a human and the rest of nature.

Well, after reading that, even tabloids do need their sources of quality intelligence though I know their only point is to get their viewership which is why they will manipulate some of their articles, though the source you provided does go alot more deeper into the matter. VERY deep have gotten myself some tea to actually read through it all now.

 

[David]

What I mean is, I 100% belive 'God' does not exist, Becuase I have not seen physical or scientific evidence.

That's a poor argument.

Even out of the context of the existence of God, the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. You are making a scientific claim and an epistemological claim.

The scientific community will never say "God does not exist, 100%", because that's more unscientific than just making a claim that God exists.

That's why you have great scientists like PCW Davies who is an agnostic, or even Richard Dawkins who says a Deistic God may be possible, but unlikely, or Stephen Hawking who aims to provide theories/explanations of the existence of the universe. They never say with 100% certainty that God does not exist, because that is very unscientific without evidence or empirical knowledge.

 

[Justin]

I want to say he does but ive seen too many things in life to make me think he is there. Being a LEO I see a lot of stuff day to day. Whats worse is what ive seen off work. My dear girlfriend killing herself, all these mass shootings, the evil. Not trying to change anyones beliefs but if he is there, his master plan for us all better be amazing.

 

[Fergal]

Being a LEO

What's a LEO?

I also find it difficult to understand why a just God would allow terrible things to happen to good people. Over 20,000 children die from poverty every day, it's just so difficult to even comprehend.