• Look around; is it science or the creator?

    Everything around us supports the fact that God does exist. Starting off with the smallest particle in nature to it's largest. God has beautifully done all of it, his powers are unquestionable. A lot of people may argue on this because they believe that science is more evident and explanatory. I have one question for them; doesn't almost every religion in the world support the existence of God? Ideas like that don't come from a simple human's mind, every detail of our body is remarkable.

    Posted by: YAbu
  • Probably not a religious God

    But look at how precisely every value had to be tuned to allow for the existence of intelligent, reproductive life. There are 40 constants which if changed by more than a decimal place would not allow for intelligent life to exist anywhere in the cosmos. This is impossible to ultimately be accounted for by mere chance or necessity. If there is a designer, however, it would only be natural for him to want intelligent life like him to be here.

  • You can't prove he does not exist.

    Indeed, we can't point to him and say, "he exists look", since he isn't solid and visible.
    But at the same time, nobody can prove that he does not exist.
    I wonder, why people argue about something not existing if it does not exist.

    Someone had to start something to make the universe as it is today,
    the world did not just randomly start creating itself on its own.

  • God is real, He is very real.

    To those people saying no / Atheists: You say that we have no proof that God exists, but do you have proof that he DOESN'T exist?

    I think this very universe is proof that God exists. Everything is somehow linked to one another through a (seemingly) perfect system. Take the food chain for an example. Energy is transferred to one animal to another. If the population of a particular species takes a sudden change, it will affect another species too.

    An example:
    In a garden, there are worms, and birds. Say, more birds are being released into the garden. The amount of worms will be decreased, because there are more predators. Now, with the amount of prey decreased, the birds will move out of the garden, or die, right? And everything will be back to balance when... The number of worms increase due to fewer natural predators and with more prey (worms), the number of birds will go back to its original.

    Now, only a perfect being, God, can create such a perfect system. You may argue that it was the big bang or whatever that created this world, but always always remember, that that is just a theory. It isn't enough proof to prove that God doesn't exist.

    Miracles happen too. Miracles are only called miracles cause something good happened when everything seemed hopeless. Now, how can you call that a coincidence? Miracles happen during crucial moments. So why/how on earth, are they coincidences. Coincidences may be things like... Say, meeting a long lost friend, or even reading this! Coincidences happen all the time, so I argue that you can't call miracles coincidences simply cause miracles only happen during crucial moments, when all hope is lost. Cause God cares about us.

    Now, the most popular question that Atheists pose would be: If God truly exists, why would he allow people to suffer, or crimes to happen? Doesn't He care about us? This question is definitely valid, but here's my answer for you. How can you blame suffering/crimes on God? It's as good as say... Blaming policemen for robbery. Now, imagine... If God just came down from the sky and stop all bad from happening. No more crimes, no more natural disasters, no more suffering... Don't you think people are "forced" to believe that God exists? Because there would be physical proof, concrete evidence that He exists, right there. Why would God want that? God would obviously want people to have a free will of believing in him.


    ^This link states that Noah's Ark has been discovered. You might argue that we shouldn't trust the internet. But believe it or not, your choice.

  • You just proved His existence

    By asking that question you are using logic and reasoning. You assume that those words have meaning or else it would just be an arbitrary statement. You also presuppose uniformity by thinking that your words will mean the same thing they did the last time you used them. No worldview or religion other than Christianity can give an account for those things. Evolution definitely can't. To deny God you have to use His logic. Autonomous reasoning is impossible. You depend on His logic and foolishly use it to try and disprove Him.

  • We know metaphysically and scientifically

    "The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of his hands. Day after day they pour forth speech; night after night they reveal knowledge. They have no speech, they use no words; no sound is heard from them. Yet their voice[b] goes out into all the earth, their words to the ends of the world" (Psalm 19: 1-4).

  • What about the Universe?

    The endless vast universe is too complicated and synchronized to dismiss a maker for such creation. You can not prove that God exists, nor can you prove that he does not. That is why people choose to 'Believe' in God. In a higher power responsible for everything around us, starting with our little narrow world and rationale existence. I wish not to believe that the universe came to exist out of nothing. The chance of the random portability is improbable.

  • Its impossible to neglect supernaturality

    The whole universe is indebted to god. God may just be a thought, a feeling, a power...... May be anything but the fact remains intact that god do prevail. God exists as a mark of divinity. God is the one whose existence can be traced since the indus valley civilization,

  • We can't answer this with facts

    Stop trying to explain the existence of a god, or lack thereof, with facts. This is called gnosticism. There is no way to prove that a god exists or not. All we can do is believe.

    You cannot say "there is a god and you're wrong that there isn't."
    Likewise, you can't say "there is no god and you're wrong by saying there is."

    Science does not prove or disprove anything.

  • Too many unexplainables exist

    We know that this universe is huge. Astronomically huge. We know that there are hundreds of different variables that are absolutely necessary for our existence today- not just our life, but ANY life. When you take a look at the big bang, if changed the strength of that explosion, given the size of the universe, by 1 in 1 trillion trillion trillion trillion trillionths, the universe would either expand too fast for even stars to form, or that the universe would collapse back in on itself. This is only one of the variables. You also have to take in gravity, our place in the universe, the star we are orbiting, the large moon size, our eliptical orbit, our exact axial tilt, etc. There HAS to be a God.

  • There's no chance he actually exists!

    God doesnt exist as the world cannot have been created just like that. People say we were created by god, personally i think thats bull as humans are not a game like the Sims and we have evolved cells which proves we started of as animals. Also if god does really exist, why does he let bad things happen to humans; such as tornadoes, floods, meteorites and so on. Why does he let so many little children be abducted, raped or even killed? Doesn't he care about his people?

  • Science just makes sense.

    The world, and evolution is just logical. Just because you read something in a book does not make it automatically true. I personally believe that if there was a God the world would be a way better place than what it is now. If God was real I think that the world would be a utopia and everyone would actually love their neighbours instead of hating each other and hurting each other.

  • Burden of Proof

    The burden of proof lies with the theists rather than the atheists. It is not our job to disprove god, it is their job to prove god. Imagine I told you that I can shoot lasers from my fingertips when I am not being observed, the logical thing to do is to doubt me. I have not given you a reason to take what I say as credible therefor you have no reason to believe me. If the burden of proof was the other way around than any unfalsifiable statement would need to be taken as fact until any evidence to the contrary presents itself. As long as there is no air-tight argument or evidence for god than there is no reason to believe in it.

  • I don't think so.

    I can't really prove that he exists, but where are Christians proof that God does exist. No where. I'm an atheist, and every Christian I've debated with have quoted the bible to back up their argument. This is very illogical to say the Bible is real...By quoting the bible. Doesn't make sense.

  • Why would God exist?

    Why would a "Superior" being, such as a god, exist? Inevitably his existence lead to something beneficial for humans, "paradise" or some form of superior incarnation. Why would an powerful being benefit humble and inferior entities that we are? Because he is "good"? Please. People are just scared that when they die they drift into abysmal darkness and a never-ending slumber, so they concoct a fictional and an illogical fairytale.

  • No good evidence for gods.

    There just plain isn't any good evidence any gods exist- all the arguments made are based on logical fallacy and appeals to human ignorance, or circular logic based on whatever religious text the arguer happens to follow.

    As I am an agnostic as well as an atheist, I don't think it is possible to "know" with certainty whether any gods exist or not (particular gods- those we can discard if they are contradictory or illogical), but there is no logical reason to believe any do without evidence.

  • It is all in the logic

    Humanity always believes in everything it is told. There have been very smart men in our history that have done very bad things but make a good point, For example Hitler once said, "Tell a Man a big lie and he will believe it more than a little lie." This was pointed towards propaganda. But It also makes sense to use it in religion or any other subject. To sum up everything, Tell a human there is an invisible man in the sky with no proof, and he will believe it. But then again tell a human to not touch a wall because the paint is not yet drying, they will still go ahead and touch it, because they do not believe it.

  • We don't actually know God exists

    I'm not saying there is anything wrong with believing in God. But to be logical, there is no evidence that he actually exists, there is no evidence of a greater being apart from what some call 'miracles'. As a Human race we are the only species on the earth that has such a complex mind, and therefore we find comfort in believing there is something else that is bigger than us, that we can put our fears too. We as human beings have created something to look up to, something to blame that isn't our self.

  • Wish there was a third choice...

    I consider myself an agnostic atheist. What this means is that I have not seen nearly enough evidence to support the claim that God of the bible or any deity actually exists. So, I don't believe God exists but I don't claim to know whether that God or any deity does or does not exist. So, how can we assess the truth of any claim, supernatural or not? Someone makes an assertion and then takes on the task of providing enough evidence to support it. For most claims, it's an obvious method to determine it's validity. When it comes to God claims, many of us abandon the tried and true methods of discovery and take on faith, which requires no falsifiability but rather an acceptance of the claim on its face because it answers the questions of the unknown without needing backup. How rational does that seem? We are only aware of the natural universe. When a supernatural being is introduced that interacts with the natural world, we should be able to observe that and test it. Conveniently, that has proven impossible. So, my position is that scientific study trumps magical beliefs for things claimed without real evidence.

  • We don't know that it does, therefore until we do have knowledge, or evidence it does we don't pretend to.

    I am unable to understand why this is so difficult for a large amount of people to abide by.
    When you want to posit the existence of a thing as true to another being, you provide proof, or evidence of the thing you say exists.
    If someone posits the existence of a thing that they have no evidence for or proof of, it is not viable to accept the claims, Even the statement, God may exist would have to be able to prove its possible for what the individual defines as 'God' to be able to exist.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
Buckethead31594 says2013-12-22T17:51:58.900
Whose to know for sure?
ReformedPresbyterian72598 says2015-01-04T23:02:17.693