Dewze:


No one born of flesh has the right to tell you there was something before existence,
Just Follow the evidence.

Soooo Peter, John, Matthew et al were born of steel? Bible was put together by man. Man made all those claims that God was there before existence therefore you have just cancelled out your own argument.

truthman2012:


Advanced Learners Dictionary is not created but authored. My God created the author.

I got it , your "god" authored the Advanced Learners Dictionary by creating the author

Dewze:


The op did not say God came from nothing. It said God has always existed, which means 'a state nothingness' has never existed. There has always been something and that something, who/what ever it is, is God.

Okay...And you know this how?

davien:
Okay...And you know this how?

The op says so.

DieeDiee:


Soooo Peter, John, Matthew et al were born of steel? Bible was put together by man. Man made all those claims that God was there before existence therefore you have just cancelled out your own argument.

Men will make claims, God will give facts. Follow the evidence.

Weah96:


...then which language does God use to communicate?

The language that you understand.

Dewze:


Men will make claims, God will give facts. Follow the evidence.

Why are you speaking in riddles?

Dewze:


The op says so.

And the op is true because?

Weah96:


Why are you speaking in riddles?

Your saying I speak in riddles gives me the impression that what you seek is a debate rather than knowledge.

The men that have made claims themselves heard and believed and some others followed the evidence further until they came to the fullness of truth. So, if you want a debate, I'm sorry, if you want to believe, listen to the ones who make claims, if you want to know, follow the evidence. The op gives you evidence.

Dewze:


Men will make claims, God will give facts. Follow the evidence.

Did the bible fall from the sky? Did God climb down and give you the "facts" or were the so called "facts" claims by man?

Dewze:


Your saying I speak in riddles gives me the impression that what you seek is a debate rather than knowledge.

The men that have made claims themselves heard and believed and some others followed the evidence further until they came to the fullness of truth. So, if you want a debate, I'm sorry, if you want to believe, listen to the ones who make claims, if you want to know, follow the evidence. The op gives you evidence.

Whether there is a God or not is inconsequential. We've been through that numerous times here in this section. God is a meaningless term unless it is first defined. Some people consider the Big Bang event to be what God is. And that's their problem, not mine. I call the big bang by its name, Big Bang. As long as the God doesn't talk, we're good.

The OP is talking about the existence of God. That's a meaningless OP. He doesn't define the meaning of the word God, so he's only deceiving himself. And maybe you.

Dewze:

The op gives you evidence.

You mean like titling his article "Scientific Proof That God Exists" and then in same article stating that God is beyond human experiments?

How do you reconcile that?

jayriginal:


You mean like titling his article "Scientific Proof That God Exists" and then in same article stating that God is beyond human experiments?

How do you reconcile that?

Yes, God is beyond human experiments but study shows that there is a 'cause' for the Universe and the Bible says it is God. Prophets after prophets spoke about this God, who heard Him speak. He took the Israelites out of Egypt by His power. He destroyed Pharao in the Red Sea. This is in history and both countries are there till date. Jesus came to this world, spoke of Him, the history is there. Why else do you need to believe. Your unbelief does not change anything.

truthman2012:


Yes, God is beyond human experiments but study shows that there is a 'cause' for the Universe and the Bible says it is God. Prophets after prophets spoke about this God, who heard Him speak. He took the Israelites out of Egypt by His power. He destroyed Pharao in the Red Sea. This is in history and both countries are there till date. Jesus came to this world, spoke of Him, the history is there. Why else do you need to believe. Your unbelief does not change anything.

I thought I said we were done? I wasnt even talking to you however . . .

Yes, God is beyond human experiments but study shows that there is a 'cause' for the Universe and the Bible says it is God.

Is the bible a scientific document?
You make a conclusion from unrelated premises. You claim scientific proof for something you admit cannot be tested by experiments and you rely on a document that is unrelated to the so called study. The whole argument is disjointed.

Prophets after prophets spoke about this God, who heard Him speak. He took the Israelites out of Egypt by His power. He destroyed Pharao in the Red Sea. This is in history and both countries are there till date. Jesus came to this world, spoke of Him, the history is there. Why else do you need to believe. Your unbelief does not change anything.

I guess the fact that we have the Olympics today means that Zeus, Jupiter, Apollo, Medusa, Poseidon, and the rest of the Greek Gods existed. What else do you need to believe? Why dont you believe in Allah? There is after all a Mecca, history is there. There are also Olympics, history is there. Why dont you believe in Obatala? Ile Ife is there, history is there.

Your own unbelief doesnt change anything.

There are none so blind as those who will not see. I have no interest in continuing this discussion with you because like I said, I know the way your mind is working. I am content at showing that it is illogical to talk of scientific proof when you have already said the thing is beyond human experiments.

DieeDiee:


Did the bible fall from the sky? Did God climb down and give you the "facts" or were the so called "facts" claims by man?

You assume that I have said those men's claims are wrong. You err. Those men were flesh and bones just like you. Be they wrong or right, they have made claims because they too had believed while others had known, you either choose to believe or you choose to follow the evidence.

jayriginal:


I thought I said we were done? I wasnt even talking to you however . . .



Is the bible a scientific document?
You make a conclusion from unrelated premises. You claim scientific proof for something you admit cannot be tested by experiments and you rely on a document that is unrelated to the so called study. The whole argument is disjointed.


I guess the fact that we have the Olympics today means that Zeus, Jupiter, Apollo, Medusa, Poseidon, and the rest of the Greek Gods existed. What else do you need to believe? Why dont you believe in Allah? There is after all a Mecca, history is there. There are also Olympics, history is there. Why dont you believe in Obatala? Ile Ife is there, history is there.

Your own unbelief doesnt change anything.

There are none so blind as those who will not see. I have no interest in continuing this discussion with you because like I said, I know the way your mind is working. I am content at showing that it is illogical to talk of scientific proof when you have already said the thing is beyond human experiments.

What is your scientific proof that God doesn't exist?

truthman2012:


What is your scientific proof that God doesn't exist?

Where did I say I have one?

jayriginal:


You mean like titling his article "Scientific Proof That God Exists" and then in same article stating that God is beyond human experiments?

How do you reconcile that?

I know for sure that something exists out there sending this information and asking this questions. That thing may well be a human being or an intelligent robot analysing my words and thoughts and then sending back the most intelligent response that it can. I can only best presume that you are human, but I will be well justified if I still doubt your true nature. what ever you may be, that undeniable evidence is still before me that something out there is quoting and replying my posts. Now, the only way I can find out your true nature is to find another medium to reach you. You may decide we speak on phone or we meet one on one, but that would be your personal choice. I am sure you will not argue with me that speaking with me on the phone is a fairly good and even easier way to convince me that you are human.

As your posts prove you exist so does scientific evidence (as indicated by the op) prove that God exists. If you want to find out the nature of God, you have to find another medium to reach him. Your material world and your material science can only operate as far and as wide as the boundaries of space and time which are themselves material and there fore finite.

So, yes science can prove the existence of God but can not experiment on God and so there fore can not explain God. You can not put Him on your lab tables and cut Him into parts. I believe this is what you truly crave for. Sorry, He has not given you that power.

The op talks about the existence of God, if you want to know if he exists, follow the evidence. If you want to know God, that is irrelevant here.

Weah96:


Whether there is a God or not is inconsequential. We've been through that numerous times here in this section. God is a meaningless term unless it is first defined. Some people consider the Big Bang event to be what God is. And that's their problem, not mine. I call the big bang by its name, Big Bang. As long as the God doesn't talk, we're good.

The OP is talking about the existence of God. That's a meaningless OP. He doesn't define the meaning of the word God, so he's only deceiving himself. And maybe you.

Then you should write up a post that explains why and how the existence of God is meaningless in a world so searching for meaning. It could help a lot people out there in search of an end to this matter.

jayriginal:


Where did I say I have one?

Then, what is your position about God?

Dewze:


I know for sure that something exists out there sending this information and asking this questions. That thing may well be a human being or an intelligent robot analysing my words and thoughts and then sending back the most intelligent response that it can. I can only best presume that you are human, but I will be well justified if I still doubt your true nature. what ever you may be, that undeniable evidence is still before me that something out there is quoting and replying my posts. Now, the only way I can find out your true nature is to find another medium to reach you. You may decide we speak on phone or we meet one on one, but that would be your personal choice. I am sure you will not argue with me that speaking with me on the phone is a fairly good and even easier way to convince me that you are human.

Fair enough.

However . . .

As your posts prove you exist so does scientific evidence (as indicated by the op) prove that God exists. If you want to find out the nature of God, you have to find another medium to reach him. Your material world and your material science can only operate as far and as wide as the boundaries of space and time which are themselves material and there fore finite.

So, yes science can prove the existence of God but can not experiment on God and so there fore can not explain God. You can not put Him on your lab tables and cut Him into parts. I believe this is what you truly crave for. Sorry, He has not given you that power.

The op talks about the existence of God, if you want to know if he exists, follow the evidence. If you want to know God, that is irrelevant here.

You talk about evidence and the OP. You agree with the OP that there is scientific evidence that God exists yet you also state (just like the OP) that God is beyond experiments. You do not see the glaring contradiction therein?

Leave off any talk of what you believe I truly crave for; you dont know me. Kindly address the issues!

My proposition is this: If you say something is beyond scientific experimentation, then you cannot speak of scientific proof for that thing.

Please note that there are other issues with the OP. I'm bringing up the most obvious and if that is beyond you or anyone else, then it is needless even having a discussion on this. When people start looking for evidence/scientific proof/logic in matters that claim validation from faith alone, they run into conundrums such as this.

truthman2012:


Then, what is your position about God?

I dont believe there is one.

Dewze:


You assume that I have said those men's claims are wrong. You err. Those men were flesh and bones just like you. Be they wrong or right, they have made claims because they too had believed while others had known, you either choose to believe or you choose to follow the evidence.

Let's start over again. Did you not say:
"No one born of flesh has the right to
tell you there was something before
existence. Just Follow the evidence."?

Dewze:


Then you should write up a post that explains why and how the existence of God is meaningless in a world so searching for meaning. It could help a lot people out there in search of an end to this matter.

Does God exist is a meaningless question. God is not a monophyletic grouping.

That's like me asking "do females drive stick shifts in Saudi Arabia." Of course, you're thinking car, but there are people thinking p.enises being shifted by the females who drive them. OK, maybe it's only me thinking it, but so what.

I have a few things to contribute to this, please read:

jayriginal:


Is the bible a scientific document?
You make a conclusion from unrelated premises. You claim scientific proof for something you admit cannot be tested by experiments and you rely on a document that is unrelated to the so called study. The whole argument is disjointed.

No, the bible is not a scientific document. Therefore, requires no scientific proof.

jayriginal:

I guess the fact that we have the Olympics today means that Zeus, Jupiter, Apollo, Medusa, Poseidon, and the rest of the Greek Gods existed. What else do you need to believe? Why dont you believe in Allah? There is after all a Mecca, history is there. There are also Olympics, history is there. Why dont you believe in Obatala? Ile Ife is there, history is there.

Yes. At some point in history, these people existed... its not expressly stated in the bible (not their names anyway), but it is stated that their were men on earth who were considered gods by other men, the bible even called them sons of God.

There was someone called Obatala in history, he was a man of influence among the yoruba people probably with some form of 'mystical powers' - but he was just a man, who died like the rest.

I don't really know where this discussion is coming from, and so i'm not in the place to say who is right or wrong. However, it seems fruitless to try to proof the existence of God scientifically...

Thank you.

xyluz:
I have a few things to contribute to this, please read:



No, the bible is not a scientific document. Therefore, requires no scientific proof.



Yes. At some point in history, these people existed... its not expressly stated in the bible (not their names anyway), but it is stated that their were men on earth who were considered gods by other men, the bible even called them sons of God.

There was someone called Obatala in history, he was a man of influence among the yoruba people probably with some form of 'mystical powers' - but he was just a man, who died like the rest.

I don't really know where this discussion is coming from, and so i'm not in the place to say who is right or wrong. However, it seems fruitless to try to proof the existence of God scientifically...

Thank you.

Thank you too.

Are you familiar with the Obatala story and the creation of the earth according to Yorubas?

I ask because you have declared Obatala to be just a man but you have included foreign Gods as real Gods (at least according to men). What is this that makes us put away our culture and absorb foreign ones?

jayriginal:

Fair enough.

However . . .



You talk about evidence and the OP. You agree with the OP that there is scientific evidence that God exists yet you also state (just like the OP) that God is beyond experiments. You do not see the glaring contradiction therein?

Leave off any talk of what you believe I truly crave for; you dont know me. Kindly address the issues!

My proposition is this: If you say something is beyond scientific experimentation, then you cannot speak of scientific proof for that thing.

The op never said the 'existence of God' is beyond scientific experimentation, it said that 'God' is beyond scientific experimentation.

Hunters that go into the bush to hunt down preys usually go in search of paths that these animals may have followed. These paths are usually lined up with broken plant branches and waste dropping. The waste dropping are a favorite tracking material for these hunters because it not only enables them assess the distance of their target from them, it also helps them to know the type and average age of their target by its composition and color. When the hunters see these droppings, they know that the target is there. They have not seen the it, they have not caught it and so they have not been able to analyse it. Here this, they may not see it or catch it eventually, but the evidence says it is there.

The hunters analyse the evidence to find their target and not the other way around.
So it will be a bit naïve to say because you can't or are unable to experiment on a thing, that things existence can not be analysed or experimented on.

Please note that there are other issues with the OP. I'm bringing up the most obvious and if that is beyond you or anyone else, then it is needless even having a discussion on this. When people start looking for evidence/scientific proof/logic in matters that claim validation from faith alone, they run into conundrums such as this.

The proof for the existence of God does not claim faith alone. I have not come across any religion or faith that propagates that. Let there not be a confusion between knowing who/what God is and knowing if He exists at all.

Dewze:


Then you should write up a post that explains why and how the existence of God is meaningless in a world so searching for meaning. It could help a lot people out there in search of an end to this matter.

Does God exist is a meaningless question. God is not a monophyletic grouping.

That's like me asking "do females drive stick shifts in Saudi Arabia." Of course, you're thinking car, but there are people thinking p.enises being shifted by the females who drive them. OK, maybe it's only me thinking it, but you get the point.

[quote author=Weah96 post=29816240]

Does God exist is a meaningless question. God is not a monophyletic grouping.

Well, the majority of people on earth think he is.

And this..

OK, maybe it's only me thinking it,....

Is where your answer lies.

If you can not convince them that their so called God looks something other than a human, there is no point being angry with them.

jayriginal:


I dont believe there is one.

Who caused the Universe?

truthman2012:


Who caused the Universe?

why a who? do people make universes?

jayriginal:


Are you familiar with the Obatala story and the creation of the earth according to Yorubas?

No, i'm not.

jayriginal:

I ask because you have declared Obatala to be just a man but you have included foreign Gods as real Gods (at least according to men).

I didn't call them Gods... please read my comment again, i believe its written in the bible, and thats all i said... But they too died as mere men... they might have lived a little longer than others (in their dispensation), but in the end... they all died as mere men.

jayriginal:

What is this that makes us put away our culture and absorb foreign ones?

And i am not 'putting' our culture away... and not asking you or anyone else to absorb foreign ones.

I hope you understand.