Proofs and evidences of the existence of God

  • 133 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for Gaming-Planet
Gaming-Planet

21107

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 14

User Lists: 0

#101 Gaming-Planet
Member since 2008 • 21107 Posts

Everyone will know God existance when the end of world happens, whenever that is.

Animals will know the sins that man have done and turn their backs on them. Everyone will know, but people will deny it.

As BS that sounds, sounds pretty cool to me. I hate humans.

Avatar image for ultimameteora
ultimameteora

2573

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#102 ultimameteora
Member since 2003 • 2573 Posts

Your parents might have created you physically but you are spiritually from God.

Avatar image for UprootedDreamer
UprootedDreamer

2036

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#103 UprootedDreamer
Member since 2011 • 2036 Posts
I do not find that to be proof at all of his existence.
Avatar image for hiphops_savior
hiphops_savior

8535

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 2

#104 hiphops_savior
Member since 2007 • 8535 Posts
If a man claims to be God, would you believe him or dismiss him as a liar or a lunatic?
Avatar image for jimmyjammer69
jimmyjammer69

12239

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#105 jimmyjammer69
Member since 2008 • 12239 Posts
If a man claims to be God, would you believe him or dismiss him as a liar or a lunatic?hiphops_savior
Has he got a beard?
Avatar image for vfibsux
vfibsux

4497

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 52

User Lists: 0

#106 vfibsux
Member since 2003 • 4497 Posts
You are not supposed to require proof God exists, that is why they call it faith.
Avatar image for Gaming-Planet
Gaming-Planet

21107

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 14

User Lists: 0

#107 Gaming-Planet
Member since 2008 • 21107 Posts
If a man claims to be God, would you believe him or dismiss him as a liar or a lunatic?hiphops_savior
Claiming, no. It would be deceiving and no one can't claim as being a God, and no one can look someone above God.
Avatar image for AnnoyedDragon
AnnoyedDragon

9948

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#108 AnnoyedDragon
Member since 2006 • 9948 Posts

The problem with "proof of God" arguments is YouTube is just a few clicks away. The YouTube Atheist and Theist crowds have been at it for years, so there are numerous videos debunking every argument conceivable.

Avatar image for KittyKat
KittyKat

26381

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#109 KittyKat
Member since 2002 • 26381 Posts
[QUOTE="Kcube"]Jesus christ had it all figured out..Be good to each other. God though? maybe his son could teach him a thing or two.

"Look Dad, I know you are really into the fire and brimstone stuff.. but can't we all just get along?" "...YOU HIPPY! YOU ARE OUT OF THE WILL!" "...whatever man..."
Avatar image for CaveJohnson1
CaveJohnson1

1714

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#110 CaveJohnson1
Member since 2011 • 1714 Posts

Your parents might have created you physically but you are spiritually from God.

ultimameteora

proof?

I have proof my parents created me, do you have proof god did?

Avatar image for KittyKat
KittyKat

26381

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#111 KittyKat
Member since 2002 • 26381 Posts

[QUOTE="ultimameteora"]

Your parents might have created you physically but you are spiritually from God.

CaveJohnson1

proof?

You know that part of your back that is hard to reach? There's a tag that says "Spiritually from God"... it also says not to remove the tag.... but I find they get itchy...
Avatar image for Human-after-all
Human-after-all

2972

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#112 Human-after-all
Member since 2009 • 2972 Posts
[QUOTE="hiphops_savior"]If a man claims to be God, would you believe him or dismiss him as a liar or a lunatic?jimmyjammer69
Has he got a beard?

Beard and wooden sandals then call me officially converted.
Avatar image for LustForSoul
LustForSoul

6404

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#113 LustForSoul
Member since 2011 • 6404 Posts
3/4th of religious people seem to see God as a being/person. It's just faith/god is everything. Not that God exists, that's just silly.
Avatar image for Lord_Omikron666
Lord_Omikron666

4838

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#114 Lord_Omikron666
Member since 2007 • 4838 Posts

If I'm reading this right, I wouldn't associate God with "perfection."

Avatar image for Inconsistancy
Inconsistancy

8094

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#115 Inconsistancy
Member since 2004 • 8094 Posts

Your parents might have created you physically but you are spiritually from God.

ultimameteora

Then where's my spirit? : /, There is no physical evidence of it.

I don't get 'faith' All it is: 0(dealwithit) = 1, as well all know, 0x anything is 0 so... figure out what 'dealwithit' is plz.

Until you religious types can provide tangible evidence, I don't think you'll get anywhere. And I can't fully comprehend your point of view, believing in something w/o evidence, just seems like madness to me. Could it be fear, ignorance, stupidity? I dunno.

I know when I was a little kid, I questioned it(religion), and it didn't seem to hold water, so I wrote it off as creative writing. Have you questioned it?

Avatar image for HAZE-Unit
HAZE-Unit

10564

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#116 HAZE-Unit
Member since 2007 • 10564 Posts

[QUOTE="playmynutz"]I was gonna make a thread but hey theres already a god thread. Instead of talking to an ignorant. and no ignorant is not bliss get real. i have a bone to pick wit some of yall so called christians. you need to get your facts straight because your not helping the cause if you cant defend a simple question like does god exist. be realistic but have that confidence that what you believe in is for certain. god exist. nothing is truely random everything can be calculated. so life wasn't an accident point blank. we were precalculated to exist trillions of years ago. its the domino effect. something had to "knock" us to give us motion in the first place.Tykain
So as everything has to be created from something and everything is precalculated, what created god ? Or is god the exception ? then if there can be exceptions, why couldn't life itself be that exception ?

1- It is an exception because that question could go to infinity and beyond, Lets say humans found the answer of who created god, lets say his name is master lol the creator then people would continue to ask who created master lol the creator and the cycle goes on and on because the question in the first place is wrong since the human being can not perceive or comprehend the thought of "god is first", it supposedly takes a new thought process, however, the fact of the matter is the type of that perception is already experienced but it needs refreshment to the mind.

when asking this exact question lets take this rule, if you don't know, it doesn't mean it never exists.

For instance, your eyes are closed, a person is screaming, you don't know who is that person but it doesn't mean that person does not exist and the proof is the loud noise "created" by that "unknown" person.

Another example, you are in the middle of the desert, you find a chair or a lost city, the city or/and chair's creators are unknown but these are signs of existence, you don't know who "built" the city but that doesn't mean the people never existed.

there is nothing spontaneous or questions that are hard to answer about my examples and Im pretty sure there is no disagreement there.

On that note, I will talk about the theory of chance/accident/spontaneous and how to bring that theory down on it's own rule, I hope people knows math though :P

The law of probability.

lets say you have a deck of cards on your hand numbered from 1 to 10, and someone asks you to pull card numbered 1, the chance of pulling card numbered 1 is 1 chance in a 10 right? lets add number 2 , that makes it 1 chance in 100, how about picking up number 3? 1 in a 1000 and so on until it gets to a point of 0 chance of happening.

Let me make it easier, hypothetically there are old writing machines in a print house and the old machines exploded, as a result random letters are scattered all over the floor of the building from the writing machines.

you are the manager of that building and you are watching the people cleaning the floor, suddenly one of the workers stare at you and tell you to look at how amazingly the word "dog" was created from the explosion, impressive right? believable, it could happen right?

I could believe that.

The same guy comes to you and say, boss I found out from the random letters on one corner of the building this amazing story.

"Alex ate at Mcdonald's, went to the toilet and after a while cameback home to sleep with his lovely wife Rita"

Can you believe that sir? Hard to believe but lets assume that also happened.

Then the guy comes to you and say wow it didn't stop there, I found on the side of the room A Tale Of Two Cities by Charles Dickens have been created randomly on the floor and not only that, the whole encyclopedia of the world is written too.

me : 911!! we have a crazy person in the building!!

you ask why I react like this because the chance of something like that happening is out of the question if you return to the law of probability, to say the encyclopedia of the earth is written from random letters that exploded is impossible.

this way the proof is in infront of you, if you believe that something that is called a big bang that happened and it is the whole reason behind life on earth, I will ask a question, the chance of that actually happening is how much?? 1 in a trillion?

2- As for your other question, yes life is not an exception specially when we are talking about the human body, there are countless of scientific proved facts about how the human body works or how it is impossible to create a protein cell from randomness for example.

Let's hear from Swiss mathematician Charles Eugene Jai. In an experiment aimed at answering this very question, Jai set out to calculate the probability of the random formation of a single protein molecule. Jai 'helped' the situation by assuming the existence of formative elements, and by selecting a protein consisting of only 2,000 atoms (An average protein might consist of 32,000 atoms or more). Jai also assumed that the protein would consist of only 2 unique formative atoms.

He determined the value of probability by considering the size of the material and the time necessary for the random formation to occur. He calculated that the probability of forming even a simplified protein molecule was approximately 1 in 5 x 10 e+320 !

The size of the material necessary to produce that almost zero probability would have been a sphere with a diameter of approximately 6 x 10 e+176 miles - about 10 e+63 times bigger than the imagined size of the universe. Finally, the time necessary for the molecule to form was 10 e+243 billion years. This was far greater than the supposed age of the universe - only about 2 billion years.

He concluded that the universe was neither old enough, nor big enough to allow for the random formation of even a simple protein molecule. It was impossible for the universe to have created itself, and for life to randomly form.

Avatar image for mAArdman
mAArdman

1612

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#117 mAArdman
Member since 2003 • 1612 Posts

Your parents might have created you physically but you are spiritually from God.

ultimameteora



Are you physically sure about that?

Avatar image for DroidPhysX
DroidPhysX

17098

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#118 DroidPhysX
Member since 2010 • 17098 Posts

Your parents might have created you physically but you are spiritually from God.

ultimameteora
God wanted to put mentally retarded children on the planet? :?
Avatar image for alexside1
alexside1

4412

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#119 alexside1
Member since 2006 • 4412 Posts

The problem with "proof of God" arguments is YouTube is just a few clicks away. The YouTube Atheist and Theist crowds have been at it for years, so there are numerous videos debunking every argument conceivable.

AnnoyedDragon
I bet there are youtube videos debunk the debunking. And videos debunk debunk debunking. What's your point?
Avatar image for alexside1
alexside1

4412

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#120 alexside1
Member since 2006 • 4412 Posts
[QUOTE="ultimameteora"]

Your parents might have created you physically but you are spiritually from God.

DroidPhysX
God wanted to put mentally retarded children on the planet? :?

.... How did you got that?
Avatar image for DroidPhysX
DroidPhysX

17098

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#121 DroidPhysX
Member since 2010 • 17098 Posts
[QUOTE="DroidPhysX"][QUOTE="ultimameteora"]

Your parents might have created you physically but you are spiritually from God.

alexside1
God wanted to put mentally retarded children on the planet? :?

.... How did you got that?

Spiritually, those disabled children are from God.
Avatar image for alexside1
alexside1

4412

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#122 alexside1
Member since 2006 • 4412 Posts
[QUOTE="DroidPhysX"][QUOTE="alexside1"][QUOTE="DroidPhysX"] God wanted to put mentally retarded children on the planet? :?

.... How did you got that?

Spiritually, those disabled children are from God.

The disabilities are resulted in physical not spiritual..... You should know this.
Avatar image for Moriarity_
Moriarity_

1332

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#123 Moriarity_
Member since 2011 • 1332 Posts

Has anyone here seen The Invention of Lying? A fantastic religious satire that really puts religion into perspective.

cprmauldin
That movie was pretty funny too. Definitely a good watch.
Avatar image for AnnoyedDragon
AnnoyedDragon

9948

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#124 AnnoyedDragon
Member since 2006 • 9948 Posts

I bet there are youtube videos debunk the debunking. And videos debunk debunk debunking. What's your point?alexside1

Well keeping in mind your bias towards theism, would scientific facts be an acceptable answer? Generally you cannot debunk science, because if it was ever proven wrong; it wouldn't be science any more. Science would adopt the newly demonstrated evidence and science would be right again.

That's why it works, it takes in new information as it is proven. It took the Catholic Church... what? Well over a century to say maybe there is actually something to that Evolution theory? But God did it, of course. Even though Evolution explains the great diversity and complexity of life without the need of a creator.

I have never seen a theist video debunking science, at least; by standards that refer to reality. Theists can always respond to scientifically accurate arguments by essentially arguing God is magic and can do anything, a reasoning so primitive even a child can do it.

An argument this parody shows is the last refuge of religion when science becomes inconvenient.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I225Vcs3X0g

Avatar image for alexside1
alexside1

4412

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#125 alexside1
Member since 2006 • 4412 Posts

[QUOTE="alexside1"]I bet there are youtube videos debunk the debunking. And videos debunk debunk debunking. What's your point?AnnoyedDragon

Well keeping in mind your bias towards theism, would scientific facts be an acceptable answer? Generally you cannot debunk science, because if it was ever proven wrong; it wouldn't be science any more. Science would adopt the newly demonstrated evidence and science would be right again.

That's why it works, it takes in new information as it is proven. It took the Catholic Church... what? Well over a century to say maybe there is actually something to that Evolution theory? But God did it, of course. Even though Evolution explains the great diversity and complexity of life without the need of a creator.

I have never seen a theist video debunking science, at least; by standards that refer to reality. Theists can always respond to scientifically accurate arguments by essentially arguing God is magic and can do anything, a reasoning so primitive even a child can do it.

An argument this parody shows is the last refuge of religion when science becomes inconvenient.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I225Vcs3X0g

I never said anything about science, I was talking about youtube. Funny, that you think that I'm bias and yet your bias yourself. Also did you get this ridiculus notation that science is debunking theism anyhow? Sceince is agnostic not atheistic.

Avatar image for Frattracide
Frattracide

5395

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#126 Frattracide
Member since 2005 • 5395 Posts

[QUOTE="Tykain"][QUOTE="playmynutz"]I was gonna make a thread but hey theres already a god thread. Instead of talking to an ignorant. and no ignorant is not bliss get real. i have a bone to pick wit some of yall so called christians. you need to get your facts straight because your not helping the cause if you cant defend a simple question like does god exist. be realistic but have that confidence that what you believe in is for certain. god exist. nothing is truely random everything can be calculated. so life wasn't an accident point blank. we were precalculated to exist trillions of years ago. its the domino effect. something had to "knock" us to give us motion in the first place.HAZE-Unit

So as everything has to be created from something and everything is precalculated, what created god ? Or is god the exception ? then if there can be exceptions, why couldn't life itself be that exception ?

1- It is an exception because that question could go to infinity and beyond, Lets say humans found the answer of who created god, lets say his name is master lol the creator then people would continue to ask who created master lol the creator and the cycle goes on and on because the question in the first place is wrong since the human being can not perceive or comprehend the thought of "god is first", it supposedly takes a new thought process, however, the fact of the matter is the type of that perception is already experienced but it needs refreshment to the mind.

when asking this exact question lets take this rule, if you don't know, it doesn't mean it never exists.

For instance, your eyes are closed, a person is screaming, you don't know who is that person but it doesn't mean that person does not exist and the proof is the loud noise "created" by that "unknown" person.

Another example, you are in the middle of the desert, you find a chair or a lost city, the city or/and chair's creators are unknown but these are signs of existence, you don't know who "built" the city but that doesn't mean the people never existed.

there is nothing spontaneous or questions that are hard to answer about my examples and Im pretty sure there is no disagreement there.

On that note, I will talk about the theory of chance/accident/spontaneous and how to bring that theory down on it's own rule, I hope people knows math though :P

The law of probability.

lets say you have a deck of cards on your hand numbered from 1 to 10, and someone asks you to pull card numbered 1, the chance of pulling card numbered 1 is 1 chance in a 10 right? lets add number 2 , that makes it 1 chance in 100, how about picking up number 3? 1 in a 1000 and so on until it gets to a point of 0 chance of happening.

Let me make it easier, hypothetically there are old writing machines in a print house and the old machines exploded, as a result random letters are scattered all over the floor of the building from the writing machines.

you are the manager of that building and you are watching the people cleaning the floor, suddenly one of the workers stare at you and tell you to look at how amazingly the word "dog" was created from the explosion, impressive right? believable, it could happen right?

I could believe that.

The same guy comes to you and say, boss I found out from the random letters on one corner of the building this amazing story.

"Alex ate at Mcdonald's, went to the toilet and after a while cameback home to sleep with his lovely wife Rita"

Can you believe that sir? Hard to believe but lets assume that also happened.

Then the guy comes to you and say wow it didn't stop there, I found on the side of the room A Tale Of Two Cities by Charles Dickens have been created randomly on the floor and not only that, the whole encyclopedia of the world is written too.

me : 911!! we have a crazy person in the building!!

you ask why I react like this because the chance of something like that happening is out of the question if you return to the law of probability, to say the encyclopedia of the earth is written from random letters that exploded is impossible.

this way the proof is in infront of you, if you believe that something that is called a big bang that happened and it is the whole reason behind life on earth, I will ask a question, the chance of that actually happening is how much?? 1 in a trillion?

2- As for your other question, yes life is not an exception specially when we are talking about the human body, there are countless of scientific proved facts about how the human body works or how it is impossible to create a protein cell from randomness for example.

Let's hear from Swiss mathematician Charles Eugene Jai. In an experiment aimed at answering this very question, Jai set out to calculate the probability of the random formation of a single protein molecule. Jai 'helped' the situation by assuming the existence of formative elements, and by selecting a protein consisting of only 2,000 atoms (An average protein might consist of 32,000 atoms or more). Jai also assumed that the protein would consist of only 2 unique formative atoms.

He determined the value of probability by considering the size of the material and the time necessary for the random formation to occur. He calculated that the probability of forming even a simplified protein molecule was approximately 1 in 5 x 10 e+320 !

The size of the material necessary to produce that almost zero probability would have been a sphere with a diameter of approximately 6 x 10 e+176 miles - about 10 e+63 times bigger than the imagined size of the universe. Finally, the time necessary for the molecule to form was 10 e+243 billion years. This was far greater than the supposed age of the universe - only about 2 billion years.

He concluded that the universe was neither old enough, nor big enough to allow for the random formation of even a simple protein molecule. It was impossible for the universe to have created itself, and for life to randomly form.

That doesn't really make any sense (the bits about probability anyway.)

If you have a hand of cards numbered one through ten, and are asked to draw one or more specific cards, even if you are asked to draw them in sequence, your chance of doing so is never 0%. There is always a chance that the suit will be drawn in order.

The other thing you should consider is that the chance of drawing a full suit in sequence is the exact same as drawing any other sequence of ten cards. (one in whatever the total number of possible combinations is) The full suit is only significant to you because we have decided that the particular order of cards is important.

The problem with your cosmological analogy is as follows:

1. We have only observed one possible outcome of, for lack of a better term, the existence of totality.

The only reason our universe is significant to us is because it is OURS. Imagine if some force or physical law was changed such that life was not able to exist in this universe, then there would be no one to ponder the numbers and no significance would be ascribed to that universe.

Let's imagine for a moment that trillions of universes exist, each with different physical laws. The chances of the laws in a specific universe being conducive to OUR type of life is remote, but, if the number of universes is sufficiently large, it is not zero. In that strata of universes, we might find another with physical laws different than our own. In this universe, our lifeforms could not exist, but a different kind could. The likelihood of our universe existing is the exact same as theirs. Certainly those creatures would marvel at the odds of their universe having come into being. But the likelihood of any specific universe existing is the same. Its only significance is what is ascribed to it by us. Of course, all of this assumes that existence is based solely on probability.

2. There is no reason to assume probability is the only force acting on the universe.

We do not know enough about the basic forces of the universe to state that they exist only because of chance. Currently, there is no basis to make that assumption. It is just as likely that there is some selective pressure acting on universal formation. Concerning the more regional influences on life we observe the action of selective pressures. Your anecdote about the Swiss mathematician* is irrelevant because protein molecules where not formed by chance alone. Selective pressures acted upon preexisting (and relatively simple) compounds to make more complex compounds which were again selected for or against to make even more complex compounds until a protein sequence is formed.

Going back to your card analogy, let's say instead of drawing ten cards at random, we draw one card and, based on the outcome of that card, decide whether or not to keep or discard it.

On the first draw we have a one in ten chance of getting the right card. If we draw the card and find a one (the card we want) we keep it, anything else we throw back. After doing this for a while, eventually we would get a "one." Since we are retaining the one, the next draw holds a greater chance of selecting the right card (a one in nine chance.) Keeping the "one" makes it easier to find the "two" if we find the "two," we get to keep it as well, which in turn makes it easier to find the next card, so on and so fourth. Obviously this is not random chance. We are selecting for certain cards and against others. This process better describes the formation of proteins than simple chance.

* I decided to look up this guy, He does not seem to exist except inside the lore of religious apologetics. Given the incredibly stupid conclusion he drew, I suspect he was made up by some religious person in order to further their cause.

Avatar image for killerband55
killerband55

107961

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#127 killerband55
Member since 2003 • 107961 Posts

Proofs? How boring.

Necrifer

i agree

Avatar image for AnnoyedDragon
AnnoyedDragon

9948

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#129 AnnoyedDragon
Member since 2006 • 9948 Posts

I never said anything about science, I was talking about youtube. Funny, that you think that I'm bias and yet your bias yourself. Also did you get this ridiculus notation that science is debunking theism anyhow? Sceince is agnostic not atheistic.

alexside1

You're missing the point.

If a Theist makes an argument that is scientifically inaccurate, then science can debunk their argument. You said you bet there are videos debunking those videos, which as I just explained; cannot happen if the counter arguments are scientifically accurate. Only when entering the "God is magic" territory does scientific arguments become a problem, because the Theist can make up anything at that point.

I am also not arguing science is Atheistic, though it is certainly not Agnostic either. Science only concerns itself with truths, not maybes. I'm simply saying your statement of "debunking debunks" isn't valid in Atheist Vs Theist YouTube debate, when it comes to scientific debates.

Avatar image for Riverwolf007
Riverwolf007

26023

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#130 Riverwolf007
Member since 2005 • 26023 Posts

One of the proofs and demonstrations of the existence of God is the fact that man did not create himself: nay, his creator and designer is another than himself.

It is certain and indisputable that the creator of man is not like man because a powerless creature cannot create another being. The maker, the creator, has to possess all perfections in order that he may create.

Can the creation be perfect and the creator imperfect? Can a picture be a masterpiece and the painter imperfect in his art? For it is his art and his creation. Moreover, the picture cannot be like the painter; otherwise, the painting would have created itself. However perfect the picture may be, in comparison with the painter it is in the utmost degree of imperfection.

The contingent world is the source of imperfections: God is the origin of perfections. The imperfections of the contingent world are in themselves a proof of the perfections of God.

For example, when you look at man, you see that he is weak. This very weakness of the creature is a proof of the power of the Eternal Almighty One, because, if there were no power, weakness could not be imagined. Then the weakness of the creature is a proof of the power of God; for if there were no power, there could be no weakness; so from this weakness it becomes evident that there is power in the world. Again, in the contingent world there is poverty; then necessarily wealth exists, since poverty is apparent in the world. In the contingent world there is ignorance; necessarily knowledge exists, because ignorance is found; for if there were no knowledge, neither would there be ignorance. Ignorance is the nonexistence of knowledge, and if there were no existence, nonexistence could not be realized.

It is certain that the whole contingent world is subjected to a law and rule which it can never disobey; even man is forced to submit to death, to sleep and to other conditions-that is to say, man in certain particulars is governed, and necessarily this state of being governed implies the existence of a governor. Because a characteristic of contingent beings is dependency, and this dependency is an essential necessity, therefore, there must be an independent being whose independence is essential.

In the same way it is understood from the man who is sick that there must be one who is in health; for if there were no health, his sickness could not be proved.

Therefore, it becomes evident that there is an Eternal Almighty One, Who is the possessor of all perfections, because unless He possessed all perfections He would be like His creation.

Throughout the world of existence it is the same; the smallest created thing proves that there is a creator. For instance, this piece of bread proves that it has a maker.

Praise be to God! the least change produced in the form of the smallest thing proves the existence of a creator: then can this great universe, which is endless, be self-created and come into existence from the action of matter and the elements? How self-evidently wrong is such a supposition!

These obvious arguments are adduced for weak souls; but if the inner perception be open, a hundred thousand clear proofs become visible. Thus, when man feels the indwelling spirit he is in no need of arguments for its existence; but for those who are deprived of the bounty of the spirit, it is necessary to establish external arguments.

Abdul Baha - Some Answered Questions: Part 1, Chapter 2.

ultimameteora

what a load of tripe.

if god exists you can be sure of one thing, not one single religion on earth has got it right.

the unknowable is unknowable and every religion is just floundering about making things up and using the things they make up to put other people into some kind of slavery be it physical or mental.

my neighbors believe the earth is 6,000 years old, dinos dug for food in the earth and got buried accidently and that every animal on the planet lived within walking distance of some guys boat.

it is shameful what religion has done to the world.

Avatar image for Optical_Order
Optical_Order

5100

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#131 Optical_Order
Member since 2008 • 5100 Posts

This has to be a troll... seriously.

Avatar image for kraken2109
kraken2109

13271

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#132 kraken2109
Member since 2009 • 13271 Posts

tl;dr

Avatar image for Miroku32
Miroku32

8666

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 43

User Lists: 0

#133 Miroku32
Member since 2006 • 8666 Posts
You know TC, you convinced me.... to not believe in god.