God Exists - Absolute Proofs

[MilesAbbott]

Widdershins, I'm not going to go point by point with you ad naseum. It's too time-consuming and fruitless. I will respond to a couple of things, though.

It doesn't spontaneously come into existence NOW.  We cannot say what things were like before our universe and its laws existed.

What a nonsensical argument. You cite a lack of knowledge as knowledge. The Big Bang theory is just a theory, and looking beyond that theory is simply pointless. Just because you say "we cannot say" doesn't prevent us from applying logic that is perfectly reasonable, that is, that something cannot come from nothing. You want to throw out the baby with the bathwater simply because the baby doesn't suit your argument. There is no reason to assume that something could've come from nothing in any context, if we're being reasonable. Again, this is not difficult to grasp: nothing does not create anything, can't, won't, never will and never did, because nothing doesn't DO anything, isn't anything. Logically, you MUST come to a point at which there was simply nothing at all, and for something to come from that is impossible.

It is quite another thing as well to assert that a random explosion of matter and gases resulted in the extraordinary symmetry that is fully evident in creation, but I suppose that's another argument altogether.

Yes, if you're too small-minded to understand that the laws of physics within our universe do not exist "before" our universe, meaning that we have no possible way of knowing what was and was not possible and applying our understanding of this universe to a pre-universe is simply ignorant.

Is it my being small-minded to question the validity of a thing that scientists claim is the way the universe was created, all while they say it is pure theory? And just because they say "we don't know how it was before" I am small-minded for pointing to reasonable logic that explains everything perfectly? It's fine to say "I don't know," but to say that a lack of knowledge completely discounts reasonable logic it quite another thing.

This is a "claim", not a "proof".  In other religions other gods are the only ones capable of doing the impossible.  That you believe that your god, specifically, is the only true one is your belief, not proof of anything.

Yes, it is certainly a claim. But this is a section entitled "Religion General Discussion," which naturally should include theological claims and arguments. Nonetheless, your requirements for proof are stupendous and entirely unreasonable. From your perspective, if there actually is a God, you think you have the right to demand proof of His existence. Who are you compared to God? It's arrogant presumption.

Okay.  I'll just wait and hope, too, doing exactly what God wants me to do in the meantime.  How convenient that what God wants me to do is exactly what I want to do.

If you're living in sin, you aren't doing what God wants you to do, but you are doing what He is willing you to do. You must continue in your sins until they have destroyed you, physically or spiritually, and you realize your need for Him fully.

Yes, it is God's will that we sin, but that doesn't negate our responsibility. Why should it? We aren't robots. Why do you think God is going to have mercy on you, as He will have on all men, eventually? Would He be so cruel as to make you a sinner and never fix you? No, that isn't how He works.

[Atheon]

Haven't you read anything he has said?  He has clearly given you all the evidence in the form of unfounded, unproven claims!  You just cannot see it because God doesn't want you to!

Bibble sez so so it must be TRU!

[widdershins]

Blah, blah, blah, I don't get it.

Come back when you understand the meanings of really complicated words like "science", "logic", "assertion", "theory" and "argument".  Since you obviously do not understand a thing I've told you and, in fact, do not even seem to understand that the argument "Something cannot come from nothing" by necessity assumed the laws of physics as we know them there is nothing I can teach you.  You have no interest in entertaining a point of view which does not wholeheartedly agree with yours, refusing even the slightest attempt to understand.  So I won't cast my pearls before the swine, so to speak.  IF you decide you would like to have an INTELLIGENT conversation then, by all means, let me know.  Until then just assume any time you post something I am responding with something witting pointing out how imbecilic your post was.  It will save us both some time.

[doorknob]

Widdershins, I'm not going to go point by point with you ad naseum. It's too time-consuming and fruitless. I will respond to a couple of things, though.

It doesn't spontaneously come into existence NOW.  We cannot say what things were like before our universe and its laws existed.

What a nonsensical argument. You cite a lack of knowledge as knowledge. The Big Bang theory is just a theory, and looking beyond that theory is simply pointless. Just because you say "we cannot say" doesn't prevent us from applying logic that is perfectly reasonable, that is, that something cannot come from nothing. You want to throw out the baby with the bathwater simply because the baby doesn't suit your argument. There is no reason to assume that something could've come from nothing in any context, if we're being reasonable. Again, this is not difficult to grasp: nothing does not create anything, can't, won't, never will and never did, because nothing doesn't DO anything, isn't anything. Logically, you MUST come to a point at which there was simply nothing at all, and for something to come from that is impossible.

It is quite another thing as well to assert that a random explosion of matter and gases resulted in the extraordinary symmetry that is fully evident in creation, but I suppose that's another argument altogether.

Yes, if you're too small-minded to understand that the laws of physics within our universe do not exist "before" our universe, meaning that we have no possible way of knowing what was and was not possible and applying our understanding of this universe to a pre-universe is simply ignorant.

Is it my being small-minded to question the validity of a thing that scientists claim is the way the universe was created, all while they say it is pure theory? And just because they say "we don't know how it was before" I am small-minded for pointing to reasonable logic that explains everything perfectly? It's fine to say "I don't know," but to say that a lack of knowledge completely discounts reasonable logic it quite another thing.

This is a "claim", not a "proof".  In other religions other gods are the only ones capable of doing the impossible.  That you believe that your god, specifically, is the only true one is your belief, not proof of anything.

Yes, it is certainly a claim. But this is a section entitled "Religion General Discussion," which naturally should include theological claims and arguments. Nonetheless, your requirements for proof are stupendous and entirely unreasonable. From your perspective, if there actually is a God, you think you have the right to demand proof of His existence. Who are you compared to God? It's arrogant presumption.

Okay.  I'll just wait and hope, too, doing exactly what God wants me to do in the meantime.  How convenient that what God wants me to do is exactly what I want to do.

If you're living in sin, you aren't doing what God wants you to do, but you are doing what He is willing you to do. You must continue in your sins until they have destroyed you, physically or spiritually, and you realize your need for Him fully.

Yes, it is God's will that we sin, but that doesn't negate our responsibility. Why should it? We aren't robots. Why do you think God is going to have mercy on you, as He will have on all men, eventually? Would He be so cruel as to make you a sinner and never fix you? No, that isn't how He works.

you clearly don't know what a scientific theory from just the word theory is. Go do some research and then come back because the big bang theory isn't just theory. it's based on math and facts not just theorized. And something did come from nothing a pretty big something, the universe. So now you are just coming from ignorance on the fact that science has facts and observable evidence to back it up!

as for whether we are robots or not why don't you go read your precious bible because it pretty clearly shows god interfering with free will and implies that we don't even have free will. It clearly states that god chooses who goes to heaven and who doesn't. And it seems pretty arbitrary considering that he chose paul who was literally hunting down christians and killing them. So actions don't matter.

[PickelledEggs]

Widdershins, I'm not going to go point by point with you ad naseum. It's too time-consuming and fruitless. I will respond to a couple of things, though.

It doesn't spontaneously come into existence NOW.  We cannot say what things were like before our universe and its laws existed.

What a nonsensical argument. You cite a lack of knowledge as knowledge. The Big Bang theory is just a theory, and looking beyond that theory is simply pointless. Just because you say "we cannot say" doesn't prevent us from applying logic that is perfectly reasonable, that is, that something cannot come from nothing. You want to throw out the baby with the bathwater simply because the baby doesn't suit your argument. There is no reason to assume that something could've come from nothing in any context, if we're being reasonable. Again, this is not difficult to grasp: nothing does not create anything, can't, won't, never will and never did, because nothing doesn't DO anything, isn't anything. Logically, you MUST come to a point at which there was simply nothing at all, and for something to come from that is impossible.

It is quite another thing as well to assert that a random explosion of matter and gases resulted in the extraordinary symmetry that is fully evident in creation, but I suppose that's another argument altogether.

Yes, if you're too small-minded to understand that the laws of physics within our universe do not exist "before" our universe, meaning that we have no possible way of knowing what was and was not possible and applying our understanding of this universe to a pre-universe is simply ignorant.

Is it my being small-minded to question the validity of a thing that scientists claim is the way the universe was created, all while they say it is pure theory? And just because they say "we don't know how it was before" I am small-minded for pointing to reasonable logic that explains everything perfectly? It's fine to say "I don't know," but to say that a lack of knowledge completely discounts reasonable logic it quite another thing.

This is a "claim", not a "proof".  In other religions other gods are the only ones capable of doing the impossible.  That you believe that your god, specifically, is the only true one is your belief, not proof of anything.

Yes, it is certainly a claim. But this is a section entitled "Religion General Discussion," which naturally should include theological claims and arguments. Nonetheless, your requirements for proof are stupendous and entirely unreasonable. From your perspective, if there actually is a God, you think you have the right to demand proof of His existence. Who are you compared to God? It's arrogant presumption.

Okay.  I'll just wait and hope, too, doing exactly what God wants me to do in the meantime.  How convenient that what God wants me to do is exactly what I want to do.

If you're living in sin, you aren't doing what God wants you to do, but you are doing what He is willing you to do. You must continue in your sins until they have destroyed you, physically or spiritually, and you realize your need for Him fully.

Yes, it is God's will that we sin, but that doesn't negate our responsibility. Why should it? We aren't robots. Why do you think God is going to have mercy on you, as He will have on all men, eventually? Would He be so cruel as to make you a sinner and never fix you? No, that isn't how He works.

Interesting that you come in to a primarily atheist site, saying things like we're giving you a "nonsensical argument" when you're trying to convince us something you can't even prove.

Evidence or GTFO. For now, I'm dumping you in purgatory and putting a watch notice on you.

[doorknob]

The article you cited is proof positive of the foolishness of this kind of thinking, and the desperation of trying to come up with an explanation for things we don't understand. I don't claim to be a scientist or even that I can fully grasp what's in the article, but this is NOT something from nothing. Even empty space had to be created in the first place. Empty space has no reason to exist, and did not simply appear. So what if particles seem to "wink" in and out of existence? In and out of existence of what? Empty space is not nothing. And even here, there isn't something from nothing; if empty space creates a force, is that force not a thing? Would that thing exist if space itself didn't exist in the first place?

It's pretty ironic for you to make a comment about desperately trying to come up with an explanation for things we don't understand. Since claiming that it came from god is exactly that!

I wonder if you think we should just go "OH GOD DID IT!" and then never ask another question or search for the answers?

[PickelledEggs]

Miles is in purgatory right now. If anyone would like to discuss his brand of bullshit with him, go to that section. If you do not have access to Purgatory and would like to, let me know.

[josephpalazzo]

That's just silly. Why would there have always been something? Based on logic, that doesn't wash at all. I will say that in a way the existence of God is illogical, because He shouldn't have always existed - but the thing here is that it is because God is impossible that He is God.

How far will you go in order to sink in absurdity??!?

Whatever logic you might use to justify that a god always existed can also be used to justify that something always existed. Your so-called "absolute proof" of a god has been totally defeated. It boils down to your unsubstantial leap of faith. You're entitled to believe in God, but not that you have an absolute proof - that's only for stupid fucking assholes. and if the shoe fits, wear it.

[Gerard]

That's just silly. Why would there have always been something? Based on logic, that doesn't wash at all. I will say that in a way the existence of God is illogical, because He shouldn't have always existed - but the thing here is that it is because God is impossible that He is God.

Why would there have been nothing before there was something? And how is that logical? And how is a God that always existed nothing? That ain't washing either.....

Gerard

[Gerard]

How far will you go in order to sink in absurdity??!?

Whatever logic you might use to justify that a god always existed can also be used to justify that something always existed. Your so-called "absolute proof" of a god has been totally defeated. It boils down to your unsubstantial leap of faith. You're entitled to believe in God, but not that you have an absolute proof - that's only for stupid fucking assholes. and if the shoe fits, wear it.

Sorry, I didn't read your post before I posted mine.... Exactly!

Gerard

[Sylar]

I tried watching it, but if quoting a WSJ article is this man's definition of proof, then I have no faith in the rest of the video.

Despite that, there IS absolute proof of the existence of God, and it's incredibly simple: something cannot come from nothing. I've said it before for those of you who actually remember me, but this IS the ultimate proof. Matter simply cannot spontaneously come into existence from nothing. Nothing cannot create anything at all; it has no will, desire, or means. Nothing is nothing, plain and simple. Furthermore, the Law of the Conservation of Energy states that energy cannot be created or destroyed. If energy can't be created, then how can it possibly exist? This law implicitly states that the existence of the universe is impossible, and therefore only One capable of doing the impossible could've created it: God.

Do you honestly think that a great wad of matter always existed, compacted until it exploded and randomly created such perfect creations as Earth, on which life is sustained by such an extraordinary amalgamation of the elements, an amalgamation that has created economies and landscapes from igloos to skyscrapers, from carpentry to nuclear engineering? Get real, stop fooling yourselves. There IS a God, and His wrath is coming upon us all for our many and grievous sins.

As others have said, one way or another, the law of conservation of energy is true within the universe. It may or may not apply to the universe. Furthermore, quantum fluctuations seem to contradict your statement that "something cannot come from nothing."

[Sylar]

...The Big Bang theory is just a theory...

I'm going to borrow from our friend Tim Minchin here:

Try walking out from your second floor balcony and, after you have been discharged from the hospital, come and tell us gravity is "just a theory."

[widdershins]

As others have said, one way or another, the law of conservation of energy is true within the universe. It may or may not apply to the universe. Furthermore, quantum fluctuations seem to contradict your statement that "something cannot come from nothing."

He's gone now, banished to purgatory and presumably left the board.  He wasn't at all interested in any form of reality anyway.  He only ever accepted any idea which fed his delusions.  All others were rejected outright without a single thought.  Because really a brain doesn't have room for both idiotic beliefs such as his and thoughts at the same time.

[widdershins]

I'm going to borrow from our friend Tim Minchin here:

Try walking out from your second floor balcony and, after you have been discharged from the hospital, come and tell us gravity is "just a theory."

Yes, that's one of their big guns there.  "It's just a theory."  It's pointless to explain to them just how much support there has to be for an idea before it can become "just" a theory, or that there is nothing beyond theory in science.  They believe the word has the same meaning in science than it does on TV, "Wild-ass guess".